SHOBHA CHANANA Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision and has been directed against the order dated 13.12.2000 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal, who dismissed the application of the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC seeking additional plea for the rendition of accounts.

(2.) THE petitioner earlier filed a suit for declaration with a consequential relief of permanent injunction on the ground that the respondents has made demand of additional price through show cause notice, which is illegal, arbitrary, null and void. It was pleaded by the petitioner that he could not specifically pin-point and ask for the rendition of accounts in the main suit which is very germane and relevant for the adjudication of the controversy. Through the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC he made a prayer that he may be allowed to add the relief of rendition of accounts.

(3.) BOTH the parties addressed arguments before the trial Court and for the following reasons as given in para No. 6 of the impugned order, the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was dismissed :-