DEEPIKA DEVI Vs. UMANATH NARONE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2.

(2.) This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dtd. 18/3/2024 passed in Civil Misc. No.01 of 2021 arising out of Original Suit No.216 of 2019/Title Suit No.114 of 2014 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) at Bokaro whereby the petition dtd. 18/2/2021 filed by the plaintiff/respondent No.1 under Order VI, Rule 17 read with Sec. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed with cost of Rs.1,000.00.

(3.) Mr. Arpan Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the subject matter of land appertaining to Mouza Tetulia, Khata No.22, Plot No.80 and 81, Anchal Chas, Thana No.13, admeasuring 10 decimals, purchased by the petitioner No.1 who is wife of petitioner No.2 from Indu Shankar Prasad Singh, son of Late Bindeshwari Prasad Verma vide Sale Deed No.11634/10176 on 17/10/2011 which was also mutated in the name of petitioner No.1 in Revenue Record and petitioner No.1 also paying rent to the State Government and after the execution of sale deed the petitioners have continuous possession in the land in question. He further submits that respondent No.1 instituted Original Suit No.216 of 2019 (arising out of the Title Suit No.114 of 2014) before learned Court for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to hold and enjoy the suit proper described in Schedule of the plaint and for recovery of possession in the suit property. He submits that the trial has proceeded and later on the petition has been filed for amendment in the plaint to challenge the Sale Deed No.10176 dtd. 17/10/2011. He submits that the learned court has been pleased to allow the same which amounts to change the nature of the suit itself and in view of that the said order is not in accordance with law and that may kindly be set aside.