RAMKESH GARG Vs. SHIVDAS GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed the present petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 02/02/2016 passed by the II Civil Judge Class-II Satna in Civil Suit No.90-A/2012 thereby rejecting the application preferred by the petitioners under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners/ plaintiffs have filed a civil suit for declaration of partition in respect of 1/3 share of the joint ancestral property as well as for permanent injunction. During the pendency of the said civil suit, the petitioners had filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC for amendment in the plaint on the ground that due to inadvertance mistake in place of 1/4 share, 1/2 & 1/3 share has been mentioned in the plaint, therefore, petitioners be permitted to correct the said mistake. Respondents have filed reply to the said application for amendment on the ground that this application has been filed for causing the delay of trial in the said suit. The trial Court vide order dated 02/02/2016 has dismissed the said application. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioners have filed the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the trial Court has erred in dismissing the application preferred by the petitioners under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC. He submits that by proposing the said amendment, petitioners want to correct certain typographical error in the plaint. He further relied on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Surender Kumar Sharma vs. Makhan Singh , 2009(10) SCC 626.