BABINA DEVI AND ANR. Vs. RAJBIR SINGH AND ORS.
LAWS(P&H)-2011-2-364
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on February 21,2011

Babina Devi And Anr. Appellant
VERSUS
Rajbir Singh And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

A.N. Jindal, J. - (1.) THIS petition assails the order dated 20.12.2010 passed by the trial court dismissing the application for amendment of the plaint after issues were framed. The Petitioners have sought amendment of the plaint seeking to correct some typographical mistakes and also some explanation to their averments.
(2.) THE facts in the background of the case are that the Petitioners had filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of possession against the Respondents claiming that the they are the daughter and the son of late Smt. Bedo @ Bedwanti @ Birmati respectively. She died on 30.1.2002 at village Imlota Tehsil Dadri, Distt. Bhiwani leaving behind them as her legal heirs. Bedwanti was also known as Birmati and was married to Sajjan Singh of village Imlota. Actually she had died on 28.1.2002 but due to oversight they recorded the date of her death as 30.1.2002 in the plaint while picking the same from the Form No. IV filled by village Chowkidar and they came to know about the actual date of her death on receiving certificate from the office of Registrar Births and Deaths, Acheena (Bhiwani) on 22.11.2010. The Petitioners have further requested to insert the name of their mother as "alias Birmati" along with Bedo @ Bedwanti by alleging that she is also known as Birmati. Thirdly, it was alleged that they want to insert the factum with regard to her marriage with Sajjan Singh in para No. 1 of the plaint. Reply to the application was filed wherein the aforesaid facts were denied and it was pleaded that the Petitioners had filed the present suit on 1.10.2002 and they closed their evidence on 24.12.2009, during this period they never raised any question for amendment of the name of Bedo @ Bedwanti. There is no documentary evidence to prove that she was known by the name of Birmati also. Consequently, they prayed for the dismissal of the suit.
(3.) ARGUMENTS heard. Record perused.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.