JUDGMENT :

Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.

2. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the rival parties.

3. These two writ petitions have been filed by the original plaintiff. By Writ Petition No.3440 of 2020, the petitioner has challenged concurrent orders passed by the Small Causes Court and the District Court, rejecting prayer for grant of temporary injunction during pendency of the suit. Writ Petition No.3635 of 2020 has been filed by the petitioner challenging an order rejecting an application for amendment of plaint. According to the petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the amendment of the plaint deserves to be allowed and that an order of temporary injunction also needs to be passed in favour of the petitioner.

4. On 31/12/2018, the petitioner filed the suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent. The petitioner placed on record a leave and license agreement executed between the parties and by relying upon the same, prayed for a decree for restraining the respondent from demolishing t