SMT. INDERJIT KAUR Vs. SHER SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision -petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed, against the order dated 02.08.05, rendered by the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Patiala, vide which, it allowed the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the amendment of plaint.

(2.) DURING the pendency of suit, for declaration, filed by the plaintiff/respondent, an application was moved for the amendment of plaint, under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on the ground that although the plaintiff had already pleaded, in the plaint, in regard to the exchange between defendants No. 1 and 6 to 10, regarding the land jointly owned by him (plaintiff) and defendants No. 1, 4 and 5, but the same could not be challenged by him (plaintiff), as illegal, null and void. It was further stated that due to inadvertence, the plaintiff also could not challenge the entries in the jamabandi for the period 1984 -85 onwards and mutation No. 490. It was further stated that the aforesaid facts came to the knowledge of the plaintiff, after the filing of the suit. It was further stated that the amendment was essential for the just decision of the case. It was further stated that no prejudice would be caused to the opposite party in case the amendment was allowed.

(3.) AFTER hearing the Counsel for the parties, and, on going through the record of the case, the trial Court, accepted the application.