RAJESH KUMAR Vs. CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 11.8.2003 passed by the Civil Judge (SD), Pithoragarh.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that a suit was filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from making any construction as well as for possession over the property in suit. During the pendency of the suit plaintiff has moved application on 11.12.2002 under Order 39, Rule 1, C.P.C. for temporary injunction. A perusal of the application for injunction shows that the petitioner wanted at the initial stage that the injunction may be granted restraining the respondents from making any construction over the ownership of the land of the petitioner. The application for appointment of Advocate Commissioner also shows that the respondents have started making construction after evicting the petitioner forcibly on 8.12.2002. The intention of the defendant is to raise construction over the property so as to make the suit infructuous.

(3.) HOWEVER , on 1.5.2003, the Commissioner has reported that he had seen some changes in the boundaries because of the construction made during the pendency of the case. The petitioner has moved an application for amendment during the pendency of the suit under Order 6, Rule 17, C.P.C. but since no order was passed as the result of which the defendants started making construction and even the order of status quo has been violated and the entire land of 800 sq. feet has been converted into constructed area and as the result of which boundaries have been changed. The amendment which was sought by the petitioner has been described in paragraphs 6 and 7 which are quoted below: