( 1 ) PETITIONER is the plaintiff. He filed the suit for perpetual injunction against the respondents-defendants, claiming that he is in possession of the property and the respondents are trying to dispossess him. In the written statement filed by the respondents, they set up title to the suit property denying the title of the petitioner. When the suit is pending trial, the petitioner has filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC tor amendment of the plaint introducing after the sentence that the plaintiff has got title, interest, possession and enjoyment over the plaint schedule land having got the same from his father" the words "and also from his sister-in-law the defendant No. 1, under a document dated March 13, 1984 and he has been in peaceful possession of the same". That application was rejected by the court below on the ground that the petitioner is estopped from raising this plea since he was aware of the document dated March 13, 1984 and the suit was filed in the year 1985. But that may not be a relevant ground to reject the application, as rightly contended by Sri Subramanyam, learned counsel for the petitioner. But the question as argued by the lea