BHAGAUTI Vs. SPECIAL JUDGE BASTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Singh, J. Pleadings between the parties is complete. As further proceeding in the appeal of the year 1985 has been stayed by this Court, with the consent of the parties the matter is being finally heard and decided.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order as was passed by the learned Special Judge dated 4-11- 1989 by which amendment applica tion as was moved by the petitioner in appeal was rejected. It appears that a suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondents for injunction and demolition of the construc tion in the year 1981. After filing the writ ten statement by the petitioner and after adducing full-fledged evidence from both sides the trial Court by its judgment and decree dated 23-2-1985 partly decreed the suit against which the present petitioners who happened to be the defendants preferred appeal. During the pendency of the appeal amendment application was filed on 30th August, 1989 by which two para graph /. e. , 25-Aa and 25-Ba were sought to be added. By the aforesaid two paragraphs (i) plea of bar of the suit under Section 27 of the U. P. C. H. Act and (ii) dismissal of the suit on account of land being a non-iden tifiable, sought to be added.

(3.) IT has been argued by the learned Counsel that on the ground of delay only, amendment application could not be rejected by the Court below. Lastly, it has been submitted that the amendment as was prayed was in respect to the fact which was purely legal in nature and the argu ments could have been permitted to be advanced in the light of the evidence as has already come on the record by which no prejudice can be said to have been oc casioned to the plaintiff.