Court No. - 9
Case :- CIVIL REVISION No. - 176 of 2018 Revisionist :- Anil Kumar Jaiswal And Another Opposite Party :- Nirula Jaiswal And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Brijesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist.
The instant revision is directed against the order dated 25.07.2018 passed by the trial court allowing an application under Order 6 rule 17 CPC filed by the plaintiff-opposite party.
The contention of the counsel for the revisionist is that prior to instituting the suit, plaintiff had given a notice in writing to the revisionist, wherein property sought to be included in the suit by way of amendment was not mentioned and, therefore, the amendment application was wrongly allowed.
The Court below has allowed the amendment application which was filed alleging that certain property had not been mentioned due to site and, therefore, the amendment application.
The trial court has also observed that the amendment is a pre-trial amendment and is necessary to void multiplicity of proceedings.
Upon hearing counsel for the revisionist and upon a perusal of the impugned order, I do not find any illegality therein. The impugned order does not warrant interference as it suffers from no jurisdictional error.
The revision is found to be without merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 13.9.2018 Priyanka Digitally signed by ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2018.09.13 17:39:59 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad