- (1.) Order dated 4.9.2009 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Barnala whereby application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC (Annexure P-2) for amendment of the plaint was declined, forms the foundation of the present revision petition preferred by the petitioners invoking supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) By way of application for amendment of the plaint, the petitioners-plaintiffs wanted to introduce facts and circumstances of the earlier litigation between the parties about which no mention was made by them in the plaint. There was strong opposition to this amendment, sought by the plaintiffs in the plaint, claiming, that in the written statement, specific objection had been taken by the respondents/defendants that the plaintiffs had concealed true and material facts from the court and the earlier litigation between the parties had not even been mentioned in the plaint without any rhyme or reason.
(3.) The lower court did not find merit in the application for amendment of the plaint and dismissed the same vide impugned order of 4.9.2009.;