NITA DEVI Vs. ANIMA BISWAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shekhar Pd. Sinha, learned counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) CHALLENGE in this writ application is to the order dated 19.04.2008, passed by the Munsif, 1st, Dhanbad in Title Suit No. 44 of 2005, whereby the petitioner's petition dated 21.01.2008 under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for allowing her to amend the plaint was partly allowed and partly disallowed.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the trial court had considered the prayer for the proposed amendments in Para 7 of the plaint as being ancillary to the original relief claimed by the plaintiff and therefore, had allowed the prayer for amendment in Para 7 of the plaint. However, as regards the prayer for amendment in Paras. 1 to 6 of the plaint, the trial court had rejected the same with the observation that the facts claimed to be introduced by way of amendment regarding the execution of the sale deed by the defendant No. 1 in favour of the defendant no. 2 and dispossession of the plaintiff from the suit premises, was well within the knowledge of the plaintiff, some of which, even at the time of drafting of the plaint and yet, the plaintiff did not take any initiative to introduce such facts by way of amendment to the plaint at the initial stage. The further reason assigned by the court is that such amendment cannot be allowed at the stage when the trial has commenced.