NAVEEN Vs. TARA WATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 26.11.2012, passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bahadurgarh, whereby the application moved by the petitioner-plaintiff for amendment of the plaint has been dismissed.

(2.) I have heard Mr. Pritam Singh Saini Advocate and Ms. Monika Arora, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Parminder Singh-I, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent and have carefully gone through the paper book.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner/plaintiff has filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from dispossessing the plaintiff from the demised premises forcibly and illegally and also from demolishing the premises in dispute. He contended that due to some typographical mistake in para no.2 of the plaint, it was inadvertently pleaded that the rent of room was agreed between the father of the defendant and plaintiff. Now, by way of amendment, the plaintiff wants to mention that the rate of rent of the room was agreed between the defendant and the plaintiff. He contended that this amendment is not going to change the nature of the suit and suit is at the stage of the plaintiff's evidence i.e. the initial stage.