ARMA SUNNI Vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's revision directed against the order of the learned Addl. Munsif, Ajmer City (West) Ajmer by which his application for permission to amend plaint was rejected.

(2.) Stated in short, the relevant facts are that the plaintiff instituted a suit for perpetual prohibitory injunction against the Urban Improvement Trust, Ajmer for restraining it from interfering with his proprietory and possessory rights to and interest in the plots in dispute described in the plaint and further from putting the said plots to public auction or to any other use. It was also prayed that the defendant be also directed to remove the boundary marks fixed by it on the plot in dispute. The plaintiff claims his title and possession over the plots in dispute. Simultaneously, with the filing of the suit, the plaintiff moved an application for temporary injunction, his application was allowed and the defendant Urban Improvement Trust was directed to maintain status quo. The defendant resisted the suit. However, the temporary injunction issued by the court below was disobeyed, the plots in disputs were put to public auction and was purchased by Natha Singh and Preen Prakash. The plaintiff thereafter moved an application under order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C to weak leave to amend the plaint in view of subsequent events of the sale of the plots in dispute by public auction etc. This application was dismissed by the learned Munsif on the ground that the proposed amendments would alter the nature of the suit and also the cause of fiction. Aggrieved against the said order, the plaintiff has come up in this revision.

(3.) The non-petitioners despite service of notice did not put appearance and as such the revision was beard ex-parte in their absence. I have beard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.