ILLAM DIN Vs. MOHD HAFIZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) THIS is a revision directed against the order dated 30th, March, 1996 passed by Sub -Judge Rajouri rejecting the application filed by the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff) for amendment of plaint for addition of parties. It was urged by Mrs. Surinder Kour that the trial court has failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in it as according to law and the jurisdiction exercised by it is illegal as well as with material irregularity, thus Mrs. Kour prayed for allowing this revision petition and consequently allowing the application filed by her client for amendment of the plaint.

(3.) IN order to properly understand the case, brief facts giving rise to this revision need to be noticed. A suit was filed for declaration and possession by the plaintiff against the respondents (hereinafter referred to as defendants). Claim of the plaintiff made in the suit was that he was in possession of land comprising of Khasra No :1770 of which he was conferred proprietary rights under the J&K Agrarian Reforms Act and Mutation No: 984 has been sanctioned in his favour in that behalf. Further case pleaded in the plaint was to the effect that he is also in possession of land comprising of Khasra No: 1781 prior to the year 1954 and thus he was entitled to get its proprietary rights in terms of Order LB 6 and Govt. Order No: 432. Because of his health problem plaintiff was not in a position to personally cultivate the land, as such he engaged the services of respondents for cultivating the same. But unfortunately for him respondents in connivance with revenue staff have got revenue entries made in their favour. It was further pleaded that the agreement and affidavit dated 15th September, 1992 purported to have been executed by the plaintiff were null and void being not binding upon the plaintiff, therefore declaration was sought to that effect.