KASHINATH Vs. RAJEEV KUMAR MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs-respondents instituted Original Suit No. 26 of 2018 in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Jalalabad, Shahjahanpur against the defendants-petitioners for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants-petitioners from obstructing the right of way of the petitioners by putting a lock on the door lying between the two houses. The case of the plaintiffs-respondents was that the plaintiffs-respondents are the owners of the property in dispute. The defendants-petitioners who are the sons of the plaintiffs' uncle (tau) were permitted by the plaintiffs-respondents to reside in the house of plaintiffs-respondents. For last some time, the defendants-petitioners became dishonest and they locked the main gate for which they were reprimanded by the plaintiffs-respondents not to repeat the same but later on when the defendants-petitioners tried to lock the doors again, the suit was filed. It is also stated in paragraph No. 22 of the plaint that the plaintiffs-respondents have a right to cancel the license and get the possession of the house in dispute. This suit was filed on 29/4/2018. On 8/6/2020, an application for amendment was filed by the plaintiffs-respondents under Order VI, Rule 17, C.P.C. for amending the plaint being application Paper No. 14-ka. By the aforesaid application, it was stated by the plaintiffs-respondents that during the pendency of the suit on 22/3/2020 the defendants-petitioners have laid foundation for constructing a wall obstructing the right of way of the plaintiffs-respondents, therefore, the license granted by the plaintiffs-respondents to the defendants-petitioner was revoked and they were directed to vacate the house which the defendants-petitioners refused and therefore, amendment was sought in the pleadings as well as in the relief clause adding a prayer for possession and eviction of the defendants-petitioners. Necessary amendments in the plaint were also sought by the plaintiffs-respondents.