MUNICIPAL CORPORATION Vs. RAM LAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed by the respondent plaintiff under the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer that the plaint may be allowed to be amended. The proposed amendment to be carried out is as under:

(2.) THE plaintiff has submitted that he is the owner of land comprised in Khasra No. 244/1/5, Khatta Khatauni No. 103/118 min, situated in Mauja Sanjauli, Tehsil and District Shimla. He submitted a building plan to the appellant defendant for construction of three storeyed house on this land. This plan was sanctioned by the appellant by an order dated 25.3.1977 being Order No. 84. The allegations further are that two storeys of the sanctioned plan were completed in the year 1979, much before the enforcement of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1979. The third storey could not be constructed for various reasons. The averments further are that when two storeys which were the subject matter of the plan were constructed, the plaintiff had encroached on land comprised in Khasra Nos. 746/244/2 and 746/244/3, measuring one biswa. This land belongs to the neighbour of the plaintiff and has been bought by him and matter settled amicably. This fact finds mention in the judgment of the learned trial Court. Since this Khasra number has not been specifically incorporated in the pleadings and construction has been made on this land also, the plaintiff has submitted that permission to amend the plaint may be granted in order to obviate any objection being raised by the appellant defendant. Notice of this application was given to the respondent, who has resisted it on a number of grounds. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

(3.) IT is also equally settled that the amendment can be allowed at any stage which would include the second appeal also. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on Bakshi Singh v. Prithi Pal Singh and Ors. 1995 Supp (3) SCC 577.