MUNSILAL RAI Vs. AMAR NATH SEN & ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant revisional application is directed against an order no. 101 dated June 24, 2015 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), First Court, Barasat in Title Suit No. 72 of 2001 by which an application for amendment of the plaint is allowed at the argument stage.

(2.) The plaintiffs/opposite parties filed a suit for recovery of possession from the trespassers. Admittedly the trial of the suit is complete and it was posted at the argument stage. From the defendant's side, a serious exception is taken on the description of the property in the schedule appended to the plaint.

(3.) It is submitted by the petitioner that the property is not sufficiently described which is the requirement under Order 7, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, the suit must fail. It is further argued that the prayer for mandatory injunction on the basis of the facts constituting the cause of action before the institution of the suit cannot be allowed to be incorporated at the time of an argument which would virtually invite the parties to de novo trial. It is further stated that such prayer having barred by law of limitation should not be allowed to be incorporated by way of an amendment. Lastly it is submitted that the right which accrued to the defendant cannot be taken away by permitting the amendment to be carried out in the plaint after a gap of so many years.