SUKHWINDER SINGH Vs. JASBIR KAUR AND OTHERS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition is against the order dismissing an application for amendment for bringing an alternative prayer of recovery of possession. The suit was filed for declaration that he is owner in possession of property. The defendants have contended that they are in possession of the property and the plaintiff is not in possession of the property at all.

(2.) Under the circumstances, where the defendant claims that he is in possession of the property, the plaintiff has sought for an amendment to the plaint to incorporate a prayer that if the defendant dispossesses the plaintiff during the pendency of the suit, he shall be granted relief of recovery of possession. The prayer is purely incidental and no prejudice could be caused. Learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would contend that when the plea is that the defendants themselves are in possession, the plaintiff cannot now bring a relief that if the plaintiff is dispossessed he should be granted the prayer for recovery of possession. The contention is that such a prayer is self-contradictory. I reject such a plea and would hold that if it were to be brought out at the time of trial that the plaintiff is dispossessed during the pendency of suit and after its institution, the plaintiff cannot be left without an efficacious remedy. If the plaintiff is prepared to take a risk that he continued in possession till the date when he instituted the suit, it is for him to maintain the suit. It will be open for them to contend that the plaintiff had not established the averments as he has made in the plaint.

(3.) The alternative prayer that the plaintiff has asked is most appropriate and just which the Court below ought to have allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the civil revision is allowed.