LAXMIKANT @ BITLO ATMA NAIK Vs. NARCINVA VISHWANATH CHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

(2.) After considering the arguments of both sides and on perusal of the documents forming part of the paper book of this Writ Petition, including the application for amendment, reply of the plaintiffs and the impugned order, I find that the most relevant aspect of this case, as to whether or not, the proposed amendment is relevant for determination of the real controversy involved in this case, has not been considered at all by the learned Civil Judge. The proposed amendment does not include any averments regarding the allegation of encroached area forming part of the property subsequently purchased by respondent nos. 5 and 6 and if this is so, the question of relevancy of proposed amendment for determination of the controversy involved in this case becomes important. The matter therefore, deserves to be remanded back to the trial Court for determining the said important aspect of the whole case.

(3.) In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. Matter is remanded back to the trial Court for deciding the application for amendment of the written statement afresh in accordance with law.