HARPRASAD Vs. MEERHASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present writ petition, the petitioner has given challenge to the order dated 23.08.2008 as passed by the District Judge, Haridwar in Civil Revision No.63/2006, Harprasad and another vs. Meer Hasan and another. By virtue of the said order impugned dated 23.08.2008, the order rendered by Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate Laksar, Haridwar in Civil Suit No.234/1987, Harprasad and another vs. Meer Hasan and others, had affirmed the rejection of an amendment application paper no.117 C-1 as rejected by the Trial Court by virtue of an order dated 08.08.2006.

(2.) The brief facts of the case as set up by the petitioners in the present writ petition is that the petitioner is the plaintiff of a suit filed for a decree of permanent injunction, which was filed in relation to the property, in dispute, bearing khasra No. 49 having an area of one bigha, 12 biswas, and 0 biswansi, lying in village Laksar, Tehsil Haridwar, District Haridwar, as against it, the respondent claiming a decree of mandatory injunction to the effect that they are the owner in the possession of the suit property, which has been registered as Original Suit No. 234 of 1987, Harprasad and another vs. Meer Hasan and others.

(3.) The defendant respondent nos.1 to 4 at the time when the writ petition was filed, were representing as defendant no.1 to 4 in the said suit, they have filed their written statement and they were contesting the proceeding. After the contest being put in, the learned Trial Court had proceeded to decree the suit in favour of the plaintiff/petitioner by the judgment dated 30.08.1999. Feeling aggrieved against the said judgment and decree dated 30.08.1999, the defendant/respondents preferred a Civil Appeal, being Civil Appeal no. 61 of 1999, Meer Hasan and others Vs. Harprasad and others. The said appeal was allowed on 04.08.2003 and while setting aside the judgment and decree dated 30.08.1999, the suit itself was remitted back to the Trial Court with the direction to frame an additional issue as regard to the location/identification of the disputed property and decide the suit a fresh on merit. In compliance of the appellate Court order dated 04.08.1983, which reads as under :-