Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Ajoy Ruidas vs Sri Sagar Ruidas & Ors on 19 February, 2019
Author: Biswajit Basu
Bench: Biswajit Basu
1 136,ML,Ct.21. 19.02.2019
AJ.
C.O. 1838 of 2017 Sri Ajoy Ruidas
-Vs-
Sri Sagar Ruidas & Ors.
Mr. Arup Krishna Das, Mr. Sanwar Mullick.
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Anit Kumar Rakshit, Mr. R.P. Motilal, Mr. Anirban Sarkar.
....for the opposite parties.
The revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the plaintiff in a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction and is directed against Order No. 158 dated April 04, 2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Additional Court at Asansol in Title Suit No. 60 of 2011, whereby the learned Trial Judge dismissed an application filed by the plaintiff praying amendment of the plaint.
The plaintiff, by the proposed amendment, is seeking to incorporate some averments in the plaint on the ground that the said averments are regarding events occurred subsequent to the filing of the original plaint.
The learned Trial Judge dismissed the said application on the ground that the said facts are already in the amended plaint filed on September 17, 2015.
On perusal of the application for amendment and the amended plaint dated September 17, 2015, it appears that although the averments sought to 2 be incorporated in the proposed amendment are more or less there in the said amended plaint, but the prayer for a decree of mandatory injunction based on the said averments is not there.
The plaintiff by the proposed amendment of plaint is praying for a decree of mandatory injunction on the basis of the averments already there in the amended plaint.
The revisional application being C.O. 1838 of 2017 is disposed of by modifying the order impugned to the extent that the plaintiff is permitted to amend the plaint to incorporate the prayer for mandatory injunction and the averments regarding the court-fees, as appearing in Sub-Paragraph (b) and (c) under paragraph 9 of the application for amendment of plaint.
The plaintiff is required to carry out such amendment within two weeks from date. The defendants are permitted to file additional written statement within two weeks from the date of service of the copy of the amended plaint on them.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Biswajit Basu, J.)