DEBANGSU BASAK, J. - (1.) THIS was an application seeking amendment of the plaint as indicated in purple colour on the copy of the plaint being Annexure 'X' to the affidavit in support of the Master Summons. The suit was for recovery of possession of portion of Premises No. 3 - C, Albert Road, Kolkata on the ground of alleged wrongful trespass and alleged encroachment and also for damages. The plaint was amended twice earlier.
(2.) BY the proposed amendment the plaintiff sought to introduce few words as a part of a sentence in paragraph 8 of the plaint. According to the plaintiff, those words were inadvertently missed out. The amendment sought for, according to the plaintiff, did not change the nature and character of the suit. No prejudice was caused to the defendants in the event the amendment as sought for was allowed contended the plaintiff. The defendant No. 1 contested the amendment application. It was submitted on behalf of the defendant No. 1 that the plaintiff was seeking an amendment after 32 years. The amendment sought for could not be termed as inadvertent errors as the plaintiff sought and amended of plaint on two previous occasions. The amendment sought for now was not of a formal nature and that it changed the nature and character of the suit.
(3.) I have considered the rival contentions of the parties. In the suit the plaintiff prayed for recovery of vacant possession, decree for demolishing and damages as also perpetual injunction. By the proposed amendment the plaintiff was sought to state that, the two adjacent premises were clearly demarcated on both floors and that the demarcated upper portion of the premises was let out in favour of the defendant No. 1. The amendment clarified the portion of the premises which was in alleged wrongful occupation of the defendants.;