Court No. - 40
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 7844 of 2018 Petitioner :- Surendra Pal Singh (Since Died) And 13 Others Respondent :- Jagveer Singh Counsel for Petitioner :- Sandhya Singh,Kapil Kumar
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
The contention raised is that the amendment, which was sought in a suit in the year 1993 was highly belated, and therefore, it was clearly hit by the proviso to Order VI Rule 17. It is contended that the nature of the amendment, which was sought before the court below completely changed the nature of the suit, and consequently, such an amendment ought not to have been allowed by the revisional court when the trial court had refused such amendment.
I have considered the submissions raised and from a perusal of the amendment application, it is apparent that the only amendment sought was, that instead of Plot No. 1014/1 the plot should be treated as Plot No. 1034/1. The mistake may be typographical or otherwise, and therefore, the lapse of period of time would not in any way deprive the party from carrying out any such amendment, which does not in any way in my opinion affect the nature of the suit. The revisional court has not committed any error and has rather passed the order in accordance with provisions in order to do complete justice between the parties.
The petition is rejected.
Order Date :- 27.10.2018 Sumaira