ARUN KUMAR Vs. SANTOSH JAIN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLAINTIFF no. 2 - Arun Kumar has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by filing this revision petition to assail order dated 21.02.2012 (Annexure P -3) passed by the trial court, thereby dismissing amendment application (Annexure P -1) filed by plaintiffs (petitioner and performa respondents no. 3, 5 and 6) against respondents no. 1 and 2/defendants. Plaintiffs have filed suit seeking declaration that they are owners in possession of 2340 share out of 8214 share in the suit property. Their case is that their predecessor Raj Kumar had purchased the said share vide sale deed no. 2499 dated 30.03.1976 from Sharda Devi etc. On the same day, vide sale deed no. 2500 dated 30.03.1976, defendant no. 2 had also purchased 1782 share out of 8214 share in the suit property from same Sharda Devi etc.

(2.) IN amendment application (Annexure P -1), plaintiffs alleged that after sale of 2340 share in favour of plaintiffs' predecessor Raj Kumar, vendor Sharda Devi etc. were left with only 398 share out of 8214 share in the suit property, and therefore, sale of 1782 share by the said vendors in favour of defendant no. 2 was in excess of their left out share and consequently, the said sale deed in favour of defendant no. 2 is illegal and null and void to that extent. By amendment of plaint, the plaintiffs want to take these pleas.

(3.) LEARNED trial court, vide impugned order (Annexure P -3), has dismissed the plaintiffs' application (Annexure P -1) for amendment of plaint on the ground that plaintiffs, by amendment of plaint, cannot be permitted to withdraw the admission made in the original plaint regarding sale of 1782/8214 share in favour of defendant no. 2. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiffs have filed this revision petition to assail the said order.