S L RAINA Vs. SUNIL BHATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing.

(2.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India(hereinafter referred to as the `Article 227') challenges the Order dated 12th December, 2002 allowing the application for amendment filed by the respondent/defendant before the Additional District Judge, Delhi(hereinafter referred to as the `ADJ') in Suit No.38 of 2001 titled S.L. Raina Vs Sunil Bhatt .

(3.) While noticing the fact that the trial had already commenced, and that the entire evidence of the plaintiff/petitioner herein had already been recorded and the case was fixed for respondent/defendant's evidence, the amendment sought by the defendant was nevertheless allowed on the view of the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge that since the plaintiff's suit was for possession and damages, the plaintiff/petitioner was required to prove his ownership in respect of the property in dispute.