RAM CHANDRA Vs. JAGDISH NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a civil revision petition under Sec. 116 CPC against the order dated 1-6-82 passed by the learned Additional Munsif, Ajmer in Civil Suit No. 154/78. By this, the learned lower court allowed the amendment of the plaint.

(2.) A suit was filed by the petitioner for ejectment against the defendant on the ground of default in payment of rent and subletting alleging therein that a Chabutara measuring 12' X 16' was given on monthly rent of Rs. 25/to the non-petitioners. The amendment application was allowed on 20-7-81 notice dated 16-11-1976, and personal necessity of Chabutara and comparative hardship.

(3.) The main contention of learned counsel Shri K.H. Tikku appearing for the defendant petitioner is that the plaintiff/ non-petitioner was were of all these amendments even at the time of filing of the suit, therefore, such amendment should not have been allowed by the trial court. Reliance has been placed on Laduram v. Sheodev, 1959 0 RajLW 273, in which it was held by Shri Jagat Narain J. as he then was, that when the plaintiff wanted to add certain facts, which he had not chosen to mention in the original plaint, he cannot be allowed to make fresh allegations of those facts by way of amendment. It is, therefore, submitted that the amendment should have been disallowed.