NARESH KUMAR Vs. KALI DASS & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is maintained by the petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the impugned order, dated 17.9.2016, passed by the learned Civil Judge(Junior Division), Court No.2, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P., whereby the application of the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was dismissed. Further, a prayer has been made to allow the present petition and to set aside the impugned order and also to allow the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner/plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff') maintained a civil suit against the respondents/ defendants (hereinafter referred to as 'defendants') for declaration to the effect that the entries with regard to Khasra No.642, land measuring 00-00-69 hectares are wrong and illegal and the plaintiff, alongwith the proforma defendant, has become owner by way of adverse possession and consequential relief for permanent prohibitory injunction. It has been alleged that the civil suit was filed in the year 2014 and in the said suit, notices were issued to the defendants and they also filed written statement. After completing the pleadings, issues were framed by the learned trial Court and evidence was also led by both the parties.

(3.) It has also been averred that when the matter was listed for arguments, it was transpired that the suit is liable to be amended and an application was filed by the petitioner seeking amendment of plaint alongwith the application, amended plaint was also filed, wherein it was prayed that in case, the plaintiff is not found entitled to a decree of adverse possession, then defendants be restrained to dispossess the plaintiff without due course of law or without legal process of law. It has been alleged that this amendment is necessary and it will not change the nature of the suit in any manner and no further evidence is required to be led for adjudication of the suit. It has also been averred that this amendment is necessary for just decision of the case.