HRUSHIKESH BARIK Vs. BAIKUNTHA BARIK AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the impugned order permitting amendment to convert the petition to a suit, petitioner has preferred this Civil Revision.

(2.) Opposite party No. 1 filed Title Suit No. 17 of 1983 for getting the disputed land re transferred to him challenging sale of the same by his cosher defendants to the petitioner. In essence, opposite party claimed preferential right of purchase under the Hindu Succession Act,1956. During pendency of the suit, opposite party No.l filed an application to convert the suit to a petition under Sec. 22 of the Hindu Succession Act. The same was allowed. Opposite Party No.l, long after, filed an application for amendment with a prayer to convert the application to a suit. This having been allowed, petitioner assails the order.

(3.) Mr. Manoj Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in exercise of power under Order 6, Rule 17, C.P.C., a Civil Court cannot convert a petition to a suit. Besides, trial court ought to have considered if the suit, if filed on the date application for amendment was made was barred by limitation. On both grounds, impugned order, according to Mr. Misra suffers from absence of jurisdiction and exercise of jurisdiction with material irregularity.