VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA,J. - (1.) By order dated 24th May, 2016, the trial Court declined the application of the plaintiff/petitioner under Order 6, Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC, seeking amendment with reference to the subsequent developments post adjudication of the matter by the trial Court, vide judgment and decree for eviction dated 8th August, 1995; of which the plaintiff-petitioner is aggrieved of.
(2.) Briefly, the essential skeletal materials facts are that an Eviction Suit No. 61/1989, under the Old Rent Control Act, 1950, was instituted by the plaintiff-petitioner that was decreed, vide judgment and decree dated 8th August, 1995, by the Court of Additional District Judge No. 5, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur. Both the parties to the suit proceedings, instituted appeals under Section 96 of CPC. The judgment and decree dated 8th August, 1995, was set aside by this Court vide order dated 15th March, 2016, holding thus; "Mr. M. M. Ranjan, learned Sr. Counsel submits that since order dated 15.11.1995 could have been considered by the learned court below, then finding of default would have different. Therefore, this matter may be remanded back to the learned trial court after setting aside the entire judgment. Learned counsel for the respondent landlord plaintiff has also no objection in remanding matter back for fresh decision on the material available on record. In view of it, with consent of learned counsels, both the appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment and decree dated 8.8.1995 is quashed and set aside and the matter remanded back to the learned trial court with the direction that after considering the order dated 15.11.1995 and orders of review and material available on record, decide the suit afresh according to law expeditiously, preferably within three months, from the date of receiving the certified copy of this order. Record of the trial court be sent back forthwith."
(3.) Learned counsel for the plaintiff/petitioner, reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application, while assailing the impugned order dated 24th May, 2016, asserted that the subsequent facts and developments; post-judgment and decree dated 8th August, 1995, are sought to be brought on record.;