SHRINATH PRASAD Vs. POORAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner -plaintiff has filed the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 20/1/2014 passed by the Additional District Judge No. 1, Bharatpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Court') in Regular Appeal No. 69 of 2012, whereby the Appellate Court has dismissed the application of the petitioner under Order VI, Rule 17 of CPC.

(2.) IN the instant case, it appears that the petitioner -plaintiff had filed the suit seeking permanent injunction for restraining the respondents -defendants from carrying out any construction, which would obstruct the light and air to the house of the petitioner. The said suit was dismissed by the Trial Court vide the judgment and decree dated 6/11/2012, against which the petitioner has filed the appeal before the Appellate Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioner -appellant submitted an application seeking amendment in the pleading under Order VI, Rule 17 of CPC. The said application has been dismissed by the Appellate Court vide the impugned order.

(3.) AT the outset, it is required to be stated that the application under Order VI, Rule 17 appears to have been submitted by the petitioner -appellant before the Appellate Court, when the Appellate Court had fixed the appeal for final arguments. That apart, from the bare perusal of the application itself, it appears that the said application filed by the petitioner was absolutely vague and did not contain as to what kind of the amendment the petitioner was seeking and in which of the pleadings. The Appellate Court thus having rightly dismissed the application, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said order. The petition being devoid of merits deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.