KARUNENDRA SINGH Vs. BRIJENDRA SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this petition, the Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the Plaintiff) has challenged the order dated 15.11.2010 whereby the application filed by the Plaintiff for amendment of the plaint has been dismissed. Alongwith the plaint, the Plaintiff had filed a site plan and in this site plan the suit land was shown to be a part of Phati Khokhan Kothi Maharaja. This fact was also mentioned in para 7 of the plaint.

(2.) BY means of this application for amendment, all that is sought is that Phati is not Khokhan, but Mohal and Kothi is Khokhan not Maharaja. In the original plaint it was stated that the land comprised in Phati Khokhan Kothi Maharaja, Tehsil & District Kullu and the same fact was written by the architect in the site plan, whereas the land is actually Phati Mohal Kothi Khokhan. This amendment does not in any manner change the nature of the suit. If a mistake had been done by the architect or the counsel, why should the party suffer for the same? The approach of the learned Trial Court to say the least was hyper technical.