BHAWANI SINGH Vs. KRISHNA NAND AND OTHERS
LAWS(P&H)-2013-12-285
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on December 04,2013

BHAWANI SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
Krishna Nand And Others Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

<RC>2014(1) LAW HERALD 310 : 2014(SUP) CIVCC 237</RC> PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT <JGN>RAJAN GUPTA</JGN> <AT>CIVIL REVISION NO.7354 OF 2013 (O&M).</AT> 04.12.2013 4.12.2013 BHAWANI SINGH KRISHNA NAND AND OTHERS VERSUS <ADV>V.B. AGGARWAL,ADARSH JAIN</ADV> <SI> <ACT>CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE,1908</ACT>,<S>OR.6R.17</S> - SUIT FOR DECLARATION THAT SALE DEED WAS NULL AND VOID - REJECTION OF APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT OF PLAINT - ORDER CHALLENGED BY REVISION - HELD,NOTHING BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE NATURE OF SUIT - THUS [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL REHMAN VS. MOHD. RULDU [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Rajan Gupta, J. - (1.)Present revision petition is directed against the order dated 11.11.2013, passed by the trial court whereby application filed by plaintiff for amendment of plaint has been rejected.
(2.)Mr. Aggarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order. According to him, application for amendment was moved before any evidence was led before the court. Same has been rejected vide order dated 11.11.2013. According to him, he merely wanted to add one para 9-A in the plaint alongwith certain consequential reliefs. However, trial court has erroneously rejected the prayer.
(3.)Plea has been vehemently opposed by Mr. Jain, learned counsel representing the caveator/respondents No.1 & 2. According to him, the suit has been pending for last three years. Petitioner never made any such prayer for considerable period. Besides, a status quo order is operating against the defendants. Any amendment made in the plaint would seriously prejudice the defendants.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.