AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 419 wordsD.N. Patel, J.—The present writ petition has been preferred by the original Plaintiff of Title Suit No. 79 of 2007 against the order, passed by the learned Sub JudgeI, Garhwa dated 25th November, 2009 whereby, the amendment application, preferred by the original Plaintiff in the plaint has been rejected.
Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the present Petitioner, who is an original Plaintiff, has instituted Title Suit No. 79 of 2007. The Respondents are the original Defendants.
It further appears from the facts of the case that the Petitioner (original Plaintiff) wants to brought on record certain registered sale deeds, which are stated in the proposed amendment and therefore, the amendment application was preferred in the plaint.
The proposed amendment reads as under:
It has been added after the word 8.10.2007 it has been inserted "Sale deed No. 5757 dated 17.7.2004, sale deed No. 8226 dated 18.11.2000, sale deed No. 1104 dated 20.2.2001 & sale deed No. 105 dated 4.1.2001, sale deed No. 7743 dated 1.12.2005".
It should be inserted Defendant No. 12 after deleting No. 8.
Thus, the aforesaid amendment will affect the very root of the case and therefore, it ought to have been allowed by the trial court. Moreover, they are the registered sale deeds, as claimed by the original Plaintiff.
It further appears that some of the witnesses have already been examined by the Plaintiff. Few of the Defendants'' witnesses have also been examined and therefore, there is some delay in preferring the amendment application. Nonetheless, looking to the nature of the amendment and looking to the nature of the dispute between the parties, amendment ought to have been allowed by the trial court.
In view of these facts, I hereby, quash and set aside the order, passed by the learned Sub JudgeI, Garhwa, dated 25th November, 2009 in Title Suit No. 79 of 2007 and allow the amendment in the plaint with cost of Rs. 5,000/(Rupees five thousand only), which will be deposited by the original Plaintiff within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of an order of this Court and upon proper application, the same shall be withdrawn by the original Defendants. Looking to the time consumed in the Title Suit, the trial court is directed to expedite the hearing of the aforesaid Title Suit.
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and disposed of.
