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
1 paragraphs · 132 wordsS.P. Goyal, J.—This revision has been filed against the order of the trial Court declining the application for amendment of the plaint. The amendment sought for was that the Plaintiff wanted to correct the description of the property according to the map prepared by the Draftsman. The earlier site plan had been submitted on approximation. The amendment was declined on the ground that the Plaintiff wanted to fill the lacuna in the pleadings. The observation is wholly misconceived. All that the Plaintiff wanted to do was to describe the property properly according to the site plan prepared at the spot by a qualified person. The trial Court, thus, acted illegally in the exercise of its jurisdiction in declining the amendment. This petition is, consequently, allowed and the impugned order reversed. No costs.