LAKSHMANAN Vs. VELLAIYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF in O.S. No. 638 of 90 on the file of Additional District Munsif, Salem, aggrieved against the Order in I.A. No. 340 of 96 dismissing the said petition filed under Order 6, Rule 17, read with S. 151, C.P.C., for amendment of the plaint has filed the present revision in this Court.

(2.) ORIGINALLY the petitioner/plaintiff filed the said suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendant for declaring his title to the suit property and also for permanent injunction. In the affidavit filed in support of the said application for amendment it is contended that in I.A. No. 961 of 90 be obtained an order of injunction against the respondents. While the injunction is in force the respondents/defendants trespassed into the suit property on 7-7-90 in an extent of 14 cents and they are still remaining in the suit property. A criminal complaint has also been given against the respondents. Since the respondents have trespassed and occupied an extent of 14 cents in the suit property unlawfully subsequent to the filling of the suit, the present petition, namely, I.A. 340 of 96 is filed to amend the plaint to seek the relief of recovery of possession of the said 14 cents in the suit property from the respondents/defendants. No doubt a counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent opposing the relief being granted in favour of the petitioner. They mainly contended that the present claim is barred by limitation and not maintainable at this juncture.

(3.) THE court below in the facts and circumstances of the case passed the following Order: