Delhi District Court
Smt. Manju Devi vs Smt. Kanta Devi & Others on 3 February, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. M.K. GUPTA, ADJ (NORTHWEST)04,
ROOM NO.301, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.
CS No. 274/09/10
Smt. Manju Devi .......Plaintiff
Vs.
Smt. Kanta Devi & others ........Defendants
Date of hearing arguments : 03.02.2011
Date of Order : 03.02.2011.
ORDER
1. By this order I shall dispose off an application datged 25.10.10 filed under order 6 rule 17 read with Sec. 151 CPC by the plaintiff. Along with the application the plaintiff filed her Affidavit.
2. Notice of the application was issued to the defendants. However defendants did not file any reply. However, counsel for defendants has been opposing the maintainability of the CS No. 274/09/10 Page 1 of 4 application .
3. I have heard counsel for both the parties and gone through the record carefully.
4. Before deciding the application, I would like to discuss in brief the facts of the suit leading to the filing of the present application here as under:
5. That the plaintiff filed a suit for possession, damages and mandatory injunction u/s 6 of Specific Relief Act on the allegations that the plaintiff is the lawful owner of property measuring 256 sq. yards situated at Gali No.1, Mata Wali Gali, behind Primary School, Mukund Pur, Delhi and that the plaintiff has been residing along with her family members and that the property in question originally comprised of five rooms besides vacant land which was surrounded by a boundary wall .
6. That the defendants acting maliciously induced the husband of plaintiff and ousted the plaintiff from the possession of the said premises on 12.11.08 and that the defendant Smt. Kanta Devi filed a suit for permanent injunction before the court of Civil Judge and that the said civil suit is pending CS No. 274/09/10 Page 2 of 4 disposal and further that the defendants are land grabbers and that when the plaintiff objected to about the illegal acts of the defendants , the plaintiff was beaten mercilessly by the defendants and was thrown out of the suit property and thereupon the plaintiff made a complaint to PCR on telephone number 100 and a DD No. 32B was registered in PS Anoop Nagar, MLC no. 93022 was prepared and FIR bearing No. 248/2008 u/s 448/452/323/380/506/34 IPC was registered against the defendants as well as their associates. On these allegations, the plaintiff filed the suit.
7. The defendants no.1 to 3 and 5 have been contesting the suit of the plaintiff and they filed their common written statement and numerous defenses have been taken .
8. The plaintiff filed replication and denied the contentions taken by the defendants in the WS and reaffirmed as those stated in the plaint.
9. When the suit was fixed for admission/denial of documents and framing of issues, the plaintiff filed the present application thereby seeking amendment in the plaint.
10. Referring to the application under consideration, it is CS No. 274/09/10 Page 3 of 4 revealed that by way of the present application, the plaintiff simply wants to amend the number of suit property as 50 instead of 50A which has been mistakenly mentioned by the Architect in the site plan.
11. The plaint shows that in para4 , the plaintiff has already mentioned the property no. as plot No.50, village Mukundpur and that the defendants have filed their common written statement considering the number of suit property as plot No.50.
12. In the light of above discussion ,I find that no new case is going to be set up by the plaintiff and further that no prejudice shall be caused to the defendants in case the proposed amendment is allowed.
13. Accordingly, application filed by the plaintiff u/o 6 rule 17 r/w Sec. 151 CPC is allowed. However both the parties to bear their own cost of the application.
Announced in the open court
today i.e 03.02.2011 (M.K. Gupta)
Additional District Judge
Rohini Courts, Delhi
CS No. 274/09/10 Page 4 of 4