RAMESH CHAND DHAKAD Vs. SAVITRI DEVI CHAUHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assails the interlocutory order dated 10/05/2012 passed in Case No. 9-A/2011/Civil Suit by 2nd Additional District Judge, Gwalior whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC preferred by the plaintiff at the stage of commencing of defendant's witnesses, has been rejected. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard on the question of admission.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction was filed on 8.7.2010. It is contended that during pendency of the suit the plaintiff was dispossessed from the suit property by the defendants on 31.01.2012 which impelled the plaintiff to move an application under Order 6 Rule 17 to implead said subsequent event which allegedly took place during pendency of the suit and for seeking consequential relief of restoration of possession. The learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff thus contends that looking to the amendment application based upon subsequent events, the restriction of the proviso of Order 6 Rule 17 cannot come in his way.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision in the cases of Rajesh Kumar Agarwal and Ors. v. K.K. Modi and Ors, 2006 4 SCC 385, Andhra Bank v. ABN Amro Bank N.V and Ors., 2007 6 SCC 167, Mst. Rukhmabai v. Lalla Laxminarayan and Ors, 1960 AIR(SC) 335 Roman Catholic Mission Diocese of Jhansi v. Smt. Lakhuram and Ors,1988 RN 206