Paramjit Singh vs Kartar Kaur and Others

V.K. Jhanji, J.—This is plaintiffs revision directed against the order of the Trial Court whereby his application for amendment of the plaint, on contest, was dismissed.

In brief, the facts are that one Mohinder Singh son of Rokaria was owner-in-possession of 43 Kanal 19 Marlas of land. He died issueless on 20.2.1986 leaving behind his widow, Kartar Kaur in whose favour a mutation was sanctioned some time in March, 1986. Paramjit Singh petitioner herein, filed suit for declaration against Kartar Kaur and other defendants alleging himself to be owner in possession of the property belonging to Mohinder Singh on the basis of Will dated 12.2.1986 alleged to have been executed in his favour by Mohinder Singh. This Will be being contested being forged and fictitious document.

On the pleadings of the parties, necessary issues were framed by the trial Court and the parties to the suit have already concluded their evidence. It was only at the stage of rebuttal and arguments that an application was filed by the plaintiff for the amendment of the plaint so as to include the alternative plea to the effect "that if it is proved that any of the defendants is in possession of the suit land, in that event, the plaintiff is entitled to the suit land on the basis of ownership. "This amendment on contest, was not allowed on the ground that it would entirely change the nature of the suit and that the suit relates to the year 1986. Against this order, the plaintiff has preferred the present revision petition.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, at some length, I am of the view that the impugned order cannot be sustained for the reason that delay alone cannot be made a ground to decline the prayer for amendment of the plaint. Of course, if the proposed amendment changes the nature of the suit, normally it is not allowed. In the present case, I find that by the proposed amendment, the nature of the suit is not going to be changed. Suit has been brought on the basis of Will dated 12.2.1986, alleged to have been executed by Mohinder Singh. Plaintiff by the proposed amendment, is not setting up a new claim, but is seeking to add the relief of possession, and this relief, on the date of application, had not become barred by time. Consequently, I am of the view that the plaintiff is entitled to amend his plaint. The trial Court shall allow the plaintiff to amend the plaint on payment of Rs. 500/- as costs. Plaintiff would be allowed to include only the alternative relief of possession on which no evidence is required to be led. After inviting the written statement, if any, the trial Court shall proceed with to decide the suit on merits.

Revision Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the trial Court on 10.1.1994.