- (1.) Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the prayer for amendment was made on behalf of the petitioners after certain facts came to the knowledge of the petitioners from written statement. He further submitted that learned court below has gone into the merits of the pleadings sought to be amended. He also submitted that if plaintiffs-petitioners fail to substantiate their claim, naturally their suit will fail. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned order.
(2.) It appears that the learned court below has gone into the merits of the pleadings sought tobe amended. If it is found that the plaintiffs-petitioners did not challenge the gift deed dated 22.2.1985 within the period of limitation from the date of their knowledge, naturally their claim for declaring it illegal void will fail. Similarly, if there is any vagueness or discrepancy in the schedule of the land, the plaintiffs will suffer.
(3.) In my opinion, in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the impugned order be set aside. The amendment sought for is allowed. The parties are directed to cooperate in early disposal of the suit. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. However, no costs.;