BHAGWANTI Vs. SURJIT KAUR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the order of the Trial Court dated February 22, 1989 whereby application for amendment of the plaint was declined.

(2.) The plaintiff filed the suit for declaration with the prayer that Killa No. 66/23-2 measuring 7 Kanals 11 Marlas has been mentioned in the written statement inadvertently whereas in fact, it should have been Killas No. 51-6- 2(3-16), 15-1 (4-0) measuring 7 Kanals 16 Marlas in the plaint. The application was contested on behalf of the defendants primarily on the ground that the plaintiff could not be allowed to withdraw the admission made in the plaint and secondly the application is barred under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure as the relief now sought to be claimed will be deemed to have been abandoned. The trial Court found that the application for amendment is without any merits as the proposed amendment, if allowed, would take away the rights from the defendants which have accrued to them by admissions made by the plaintiff in her plaint.

(3.) The learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioner submitted that no right has accrued to the other party. The application for amendment was filed at the earliest after the framing of issues. According to the learned counsel, even a separate suit could be filed for the Khasra number now to be changed but in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the amendment in the plaint will serve the purpose. In support of his contentions, he referred to Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram,1978 PunLR 458 and Jai Jai Ram Manohar Lal v. National Building Material Supply, Gurgaon, 1969 AIR(SC) 1267. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the defendant respondents submitted that in case the amendment is allowed, it will change the whole complex which was not permissible. In support of this contention, he referred to Randhir Singh v. Kamlesh and others, 1980 AIR(P&H) 70, Surjit Singh v. Kartar Singh (deceased) Rep. By L.Rs. and another, 1987 PunLJ 184and Harbans Singh v. Mehnga Singh and others, 1973 AIR(P&H) 409.