Punjab-Haryana High Court
Satpal vs Ram Pal on 28 November, 2014
CR No. 7849 of 2013 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CR No. 7849 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 28.11.2014
Satpal ....Petitioner
Versus
Ram Pal ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH
Present: Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. R.K. Agnihotri, Advocate
for the respondent.
R.P. Nagrath, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside the order dated 24.10.2013 (Annexure P-4) passed by the trial Court declining the prayer for amendment of the plaint.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and the paper book.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit for permanent injunction was filed in respect of the property comprising of a residential house with specific boundaries. However, in the written statement, the respondent-defendant took up the plea that the property in question forms part of khasra number(s). The prayer, therefore, was made for adding the khasra number(s) also by way of amendment.
Learned trial Court rejected the application mainly on JITENDER KUMAR 2014.12.01 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR No. 7849 of 2013 -2- the ground that the case is at the fag end as both the parties have already concluded their evidence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would not be leading any further evidence in case the proposed amendment is allowed. I am of the view that the proposed amendment is only of clarificatory nature and not going to change nature of the suit.
In view of the above the impugned order is set aside and the prayer for amendment of the plaint is allowed subject to payment of ` 5000/- as costs to be paid to the respondent on the date to be fixed before the trial Court and further condition that the petitioner would not be entitled to lead further evidence after the amendment has been allowed. However, the respondent would be at liberty to file written statement to the amended plaint and also lead further evidence, if required so far as it relates to the amended pleadings. Parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 16.12.2014.
November 28, 2014 ( R.P. NAGRATH )
jk JUDGE
JITENDER KUMAR
2014.12.01 10:50
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh