BADRI HAZAM Vs. NAKUL HAZAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India wherein the order dtd. 2/5/2012 (Annexure-9) passed in Partition Suit No.44 of 2010 by Sub-Judge-VI, Giridih has been questioned by which the petition filed under Order 6 Rule 17 seeking amendment in the plaint stood rejected.

(2.) The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition, which required to be enumerated, reads as under: A partition suit was filed on25.03.2010 being Partition Suit No.44 of 2010 before the court of Sub-Judge-I, Giridih by the petitioner/plaintiff against Nakul Hazam, Sukhdev Hazam, Saraswati Devi, Badka Thakur and Chotka Thakur (defendants) and impleading Gangia Devi and Dasia Devi as proforma defendants praying for decree of eight anna in Schedule-A and A-1 of the plaint in favour of the plaintiff alongwith proforma defendants. It has been stated as under Schedule-A of the plaint description of land comprising of land measuring area of 3.04 acres under Khata no.89 of Village-Parvatpur, P.S.-Gandey, Thana No.-621, District- Giridih including plot nos.1170, 1171 & 1176 besides other plots. Schedule-1 of the plaint comprises of land measuring 0.21 acres of land in plot no.93 under khata no.2 of Village Deopur, Thana no.590, P.S.- Gandey, District-Giridih.

(3.) It appears from the petition filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC that two fold prayers have been made seeking leave of the court to make addition of the aforesaid paragraph after paragraph 6 by adding a new paragraph-6A.