LR.S OF MANMOHAN DAYAL Vs. DAU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. Learned counsel for the petitioners assails order dated 18.11.2016 whereby their application moved under Order 6, Rule 17 read with section 151 CPC for seeking amendment in the plaint averments in paras 9, 10, 11 and 12 was not allowed by the trial court.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners states that while the case was being prepared for final arguments, it was revealed that there are certain typographical errors in the plaint. That apart, it was also seen that while in the pleadings there is specific averment whereby the plaintiff has mentioned that she is entitled for a declaration of being owner of Plot No. 40 legally, in the prayer clause one line has been left out with regard to prayer for declaration and the word declaration has not been used.

(3.) He also wants an amendment in para 26 whereby he wants to add that the valuation relating to declaration of Rs.400/- and court-fee of Rs.30/- by way of PF is being paid, however, this line has been left in the plaint although essentially case of the petitioner-plaintiff was of possession and declaration of title on plot No. 40.