PINKU RAM Vs. MANMOHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been maintained by the petitioners, who were the defendants before the learned trial Court (hereinafter to be called as "the defendants"), against the order dated 12.03.2019, passed by learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Court No. 1, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., in CMA No. 286/6 of 2018, in Civil Suit No. 36-1 of 2018, whereby the application filed by the plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter to be called as "the plaintiff"), seeking amendments in the plaint was allowed.

(2.) Briefly stating the facts, giving rise to the present petition are that the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining them from encroaching upon, dispossessing the plaintiff or interfering in the land bearing Khata/Khatauni No. 195 min/434 min, Khasra No. 1859/1493, area measuring 00-01- 31, situated at Chak Chirgaon, Tehsil Chirgaon, District Shimla, H.P.. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff filed an application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking amendment in the plaint, wherein it has been alleged that since the defendants had tried to encroach upon the suit land by unlawful means and forcibly occupied a portion of it, the amendments in the plaint by incorporating necessary facts statedly to have consequential amendment to the prayer clause by way of seeking relief of mandatory injunction also, are required to be made.

(3.) The application filed by the plaintiff was contested by the defendants by filing reply, wherein dismissal of the application has been prayed and it is denied that the defendants have unlawfully occupied a portion of the suit land and it is averred that suit for the relief of mandatory injunction is not maintainable.