LOKANATH ACHARYA Vs. ANAM NARASIMHA DAS AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF is the Petitioner in this Civil Revision against an order refusing amendment of the plaint.

(2.) CASE of the Petitioner is that he is a monthly tenant in respect of the suit house. Without taking recourse to the statutory remedy, the Defendants with the aid and assistance of their henchmen were attempting to throw out the Plaintiff from the house and accordingly, they should be permanently restrained. The prayer for temporary injunction was refused. Thereafter, the application for amendment of the plaint was filed alleging that on account of the refusal of temporary injunction the Defendants with association of others wrongfully interfered with the possession of the Plaintiff resulting in loss of Rs. 4,100/ - to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the amendment was sought for by incorporating the aforesaid fact and relief of realisation of Rs. 4,100/ -. Defendants raised objection to the amendment on the grounds that it would change the nature of the suit and would also oust the jurisdiction of the Court. These two grounds were accepted by the trial Court to reject the amendment. Hence this civil revision has been filed.

(3.) THE refusal to allow amendment on ground of ouster of jurisdiction is also not sustainable. It has been held in the decision of this Court reported in Kurupa Naik and Ors. v. Bhagaban Naik and Ors. : 34 (1968) C.L.T. 1195, that in spite of the fact that the amendment would oust the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court the same is to he allowed and the plaint is to be returned for being presented in the proper Court of law.