VINAY KUMAR Vs. RAMPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 17.6.2010 whereby the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Court No. 1, Paonta Sahib, allowed the application filed for amendment of the plaint by the plaintiff in civil Suit No. 103/1 of 2008.

(2.) THE plaintiff originally filed a suit for declaration that he is owner in possession of the suit land and he also prayed that a decree be passed restraining the defendant from interfering in possession of the suit land. This suit was contested by the defendant who claimed that he in fact is in possession of the suit land. The application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC for restraining the defendant from interfering the possession was also dismissed and a finding was given in that application that the defendant is in possession of the suit land.

(3.) THE plaintiff thereafter moved an application in which he claimed that the defendant on 10.2.2010 forcibly ploughed the suit land and took forcible possession of the suit land and therefore sought an amendment to the effect that the plaintiff's suit be decreed for possession of the suit land. This application has been allowed by the learned trial Court.