- (1.) THE challenge, in this petition preferred by petitionersdefendants - Baldev Kaur, widow of, Kashmir Singh and Jasbir Singh, sons of, Mukhtiar Singh(for brevity "the defendants"), is to the impugned order dated 18.02.2014(Annexure P -6), by virtue of which, the trial Court has permitted the respondents -plaintiffs -Birbal Singh and Beant Singh, sons of Hari Singh(for short "the plaintiffs), to amend their plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.
(2.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the petitionersdefendants, going through the record with his valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petition in this context.
(3.) EX facie, the argument of the learned counsel that, since the trial Court committed a legal mistake to permit the plaintiffs, to amend the plaint at this belated stage, so, the impugned order is liable to be set aside, lacks merit. As is evident from the record that, initially the plaintiffs have instituted the civil suit for a decree of declaration to the effect that they are owners and in possession of the land in dispute and the mutation of exchange bearing No.3904 dated 30.10.2008, sanctioned in favour of the defendants in respect of the land, in question, is illegal, null, void and not binding on their rights on various grounds, with a consequential relief of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from interfering in their possession and from alienating the suit land, in any manner. The defendants contested the claim of the plaintiffs, filed the written statement, stoutly denied all the allegations contained in the plaint and prayed for dismissal of the suit.;