GOWRAMMA Vs. KANDAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff in O.S.No.102/2013 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Ramanagara (hereinafter referred to as 'trial Court' for short), who have challenged an order dtd. 19/7/2022, by which, an application was filed by the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for short) was rejected.

(2.) The parties shall henceforth be referred to as they were arrayed before the trial Court.

(3.) The suit in O.S.No.102/2013 was filed for declaration of title of the plaintiff to the suit schedule property and for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaintiff over the suit schedule property. The plaintiff asserted in the plaint that the defendants had "wrongfully and illegally encroached towards western side and had put up cement block house". The plaintiff had also enclosed the photographs showing the encroached portion. However, the plaintiff did not seek for the relief of recovery of the possession of encroached portion. The defendants contested the suit. When the case was listed for arguments, the plaintiff engaged another lawyer, who advised the plaintiff to file an application to amend the plaint to seek the relief of demolition of the construction put up by the defendants and to recover possession of the encroached portion. Based on such advise, at the stage of reply arguments of the plaintiff, an application was filed to amend the plaint and to incorporate the relief of mandatory injunction to direct the defendants to demolish the encroached legal construction and to deliver vacant possession of the encroached portion. The trial Court rejected this application on the ground that the same was filed belatedly. It also held that the plaintiff was not diligent in not seeking the amendment before issues were framed.