KISHAN SINGH Vs. KRISHAN LAL BHATIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Krishan Lal filed three different suits, one for permanent injunction against Kishan Singh and Ors. two suits for declaration against Secretary, Government of Punjab, Industry Department, Chandigarh and Gurudwara Amar Shaheed respectively. All these three suits were based on common facts: It was stated by Krishan Lai that he be declared owner in possession of the property in dispute including the shops and vacant area situated in Industrial Area-B, G.T. Road, Ludhiana and the defendants be restrained from interfering in his peaceful possession of the property and the open area as the defendants have no right, title and interest in the said property.

(2.) During the pendency of these suits, three applications were filed Under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code by Krishan Lal stating that on 27.1.1996, during the pendency of the suit, Knshan bingh had in the open space at the back of the shop/property and with malafide intention affixed Nishan Sahib. The purpose of the defendants is to obstruct the execution of the decree, if ultimately passed in favour of the plaintiff and also to cause inconvenience to him. Thus, he prayed for amendment of the relief clause directing for mandatory injunction to remove Nishan Sahib from the property in dispute and to make other consequential amendment in the plaint.

(3.) These three applications again based on the common facts, were allowed by the learned trial court subject to payment of Rs. 500/- as costs. Thus, three orders allowing the applications for amendment filed by the plaintiff in the suits have given rise to three revisions being preferred by Krishan Singh himself and on behalf of Gurudwara Amar Shaheed Darshan Singh Pheruman being Civil Revision No. 5474, 5473 and 5404 of 1998 respectively.