JANGIR SINGH Vs. MOHINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision petition is directed against the order of the Additional District Judge, Faridkot, whereby the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed before him by the plaintiff/appellant at the stage of appeal, has been declined. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner) filed a suit against the defendants (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents') for declaration to the effect that the plaintiff was owner in possession of the certain agricultural land and mutation No. 943 and 1920 of inheritence of Rattan Singh and decree dated 19. 7. 1984 in favour of respondents No. 7 and 8 was also wrong and fictitious.

(2.) THE following issues were framed by the trial Court :

(3.) MR. M. L. Sarin, Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner has urged on the basis of a number of judgments cited by him that the plea now he seeks to project by amendment is not a new one as he only seeks to plea that the parties being governed by Hindu Law were entitled to succeed to the property on that basis, and even if this suit was decreed, the net result would be that the petitioner and Raj Singh would be held members of co-parcenary. He has also stated that the amendment can be allowed at any stage and for this proposition has cited a number of judgments in support of this.