S.K.KESHOTE, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioners perused the memo of revision petition and the impugned order passed by the Additional District Judge, Behror dated 18.1.1993. Under this order the application file by the plaintiff petitioners on 2.9.1996 praying therein for grant of the permission to amend the plaint was rejected.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the plaintiff petitioner submitted that the order of the court below is ex -facie illegal. Infact the learned court below has no considered the application filed Under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. It has been next contended that the earlier part of the disputed land was sold by the sale -deed dated 29.1.1979. The application filed by the plaintiff petitioners for amendment of the plaint and to challenge the validity legality and propriety of that sale -deed has been allowed against the sell of other part of the land on 7.1.1976 the amendment is not allowed and this identical amendment as prayed for should have been granted.
(3.) LASTLY it is contended that if the amendment is allowed, the nature of suit will not change.;