NEPAL CHANDRA PRAMANIK Vs. DIPTI MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is plaintiff in Title Suit No.359 of 2007 is aggrieved of order dated 29.01.2016 by which amendment in the plaint has not been permitted by the trial court.

(2.) Stand taken by the petitioner is that amendment in the pleadings can be permitted at any stage of the suit, even at the stage of final hearing and while so, their application for amendment primarily in the prayer clause when admittedly the plaintiffs' evidence is yet to be recorded cannot be rejected. To support this contention, Sri P.K. Bhawmik, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner relies on decisions in "Mohinder Kumar Mehra Vs. Roop Rani Mehra and Others, (2018) 2 SCC 132", in "State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Nomi Singh and Another, (2015) 14 SCC 450" and in "Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. Vs. Popular Trading Company, Ujjain, (2000) 5 SCC 511".

(3.) Title Suit No.359 of 2007 was instituted for a decree for declaration of the plaintiffs' hostile title over the suit land through adverse possession. The plaintiffs have claimed that the suit scheduled land admeasuring about 356 kathas of land with house thereon originally belonged to Sir R.N. Mukherjee. After his death this property devolved upon his legal heirs and successors, however, they never came in physical possession over the suit land. One Sir B.N. Mukherjee who was son of the said Sir R.N. Mukherjee executed a Will in favour of his wife Lady Ranu Priti Mukherjee. The plaintiffs have claimed that their predecessor came in physical possession of the suit property in the year 1960 and constructed a residential house with boundary-wall thereon and they were in uninterrupted physical possession over the entire suit land. It is stated that the said Lady Ranu Priti Mukherjee died on 15.02000; her legal heirs are defendant nos. 1 to 11, and now the defendant nos. 12 to 15 at the instance of some of the defendant nos. 1 to 11 have started disturbing peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land. This is the cause of action disclosed by the plaintiffs for instituting Title Suit No.359 of 2007.