(1.) Whether a party can amend the entire pleadings after the other party has amended its pleadings or the right of the party is confined to the answer to the amended pleadings is the question which falls for determination in the present appeal. Before dealing with this question, it is necessary to notice the facts, which gave rise to the question for determination.
(2.) The appellants (plaintiffs before the learned Trial Court) are aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by learned District Judge (Forests), Shimla, vide which, the appeal filed by the respondents (defendants before learned Trial Court) was allowed and the judgment and decree passed by learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Court No.I, Shimla was set aside. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned trial Court for convenience).
(3.) Briefly stated, the plaintiffs filed a Civil Suit seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction for restraining the original defendant-Niharku from interfering with the land comprised in Khata No.6 min, Khatauni No.8 Min, Khasra No.300/218 measuring 16 bighas 6 biswas, situated at Mauja Patina, Pargana Kaljhun, Tehsil and District Shimla, H.P. as per the Jamabandi for the year 1999-2000 (hereinafter referred to as the suit land). A decree for mandatory injunction requiring the defendants to restore the vacant possession to the plaintiff was also sought, in case the defendant is found to have encroached upon the suit land.