NAFEESA BI Vs. CHAMPA RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners/defendants have filed this petition being aggrieved by the order dated 17.04.2013 passed by IInd Civil Judge Class -II Raisen, in Civil Original Suit No.45 -A/2005, whereby the application of the respondents no.1 & 2 filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC for amendment in the plaint has been allowed.

(2.) PETITIONERS ' counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition along with the copies of aforesaid application (Annexure -P -5) plaint and the impugned order argued that, firstly the impugned application being filed at very belated stage, could not have been allowed by the trial Court. Secondly, there is no foundation in the plaint from which it could be ascertained that the impugned amendment is an additional approach from the facts already stated in the plaint. He further said that on earlier occasion, the identical application till some extent was dismissed on merits by the trial Court on dated 12.3.2013. So, the light of principle of resjudicata which is applicable at different stages before the same Court, the impugned order is not sustainable and prayed for dismissal of the aforesaid application by setting aside the impugned order by admitting and allowing this petition.

(3.) HAVING heard the counsel at length, keeping in view their arguments, I have carefully gone through the papers placed on the including the aforesaid application and the impugned order.