RAM JANAM JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner is plaintiff of Title Suit No. 45 of 1997, which he had filed for declaration of title and confirmation of possession over the suit land and for other ancillary reliefs.

(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party -State of Bihar vehemently opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the plaintiff -petitioner wants extensive amendment of the plaint and also wants to change the area of the suit plot and thus the nature of the suit is bound to be changed, which cannot be allowed in view of the provisions of law. Learned counsel for the opposite party also submits that the provision of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code specifically provides that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced. Hence, he submits that the learned court below has rightly rejected the amendment petition as the evidence of the plaintiff has started and he has already filed written statement.