HEM RAJ SHARMA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INITIALLY the suit was filed for injunction. Later on an application seeking amendment was made under order 6, Rule 17 C. P. C. It was pleaded by the plaintiffs that during the pendency of the litigation, so constructions have been raised. By way of amendment, mandatory injunction was sought. This prayer was denied. Against this order, the present revision has been filed.

(2.) IT may be seen that if something has happened during the pendency of the litigation that can certainly be permitted to be brought on record by way of amendment under order 6, Rule 17 C. P. C. Such a course was approved by the High Court of Punjab in Puran Chand Sant Lal v. Nitya Nand : AIR 1958 P&h 460. Justice A. N. Grover, (later, Judge of the Supreme Court) observed as under : -