ASIM KHAN Vs. ZAHID ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner impugnes the order dated 30th November, 2011 whereby the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, filed by the petitioner before the learned trial court seeking amendment of the plaint, was dismissed.

(2.) NOTICE in this petition has been served on respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4. Respondent No. 3 had already been proceeded ex -parte before the learned trial Court. Despite service of notice, none has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No. 4. Today, despite three pass over, none is present on behalf of respondents. Thus, I have proceeded to hear and dispose of the matter.

(3.) THUS , the petitioner/plaintiff sent a legal notice dated 21st May, 2010 which was replied only by respondent/defendant No. 4. Defendant No. 4 started construction over the remaining part of the property No. 145 part of Khasra No. 127 with the help of defendant No. 5 - builder under the protection of defendant No. 6, who was the SHO of the area. Thus, the father of the plaintiff lodged a complaint to the Commissioner of Police on 22nd July, 2010, and finally the present suit was filed. In the prayer clause, the following prayers were made: -