Amendments to the plaint should be necessary for determining the real controversy in the suit and should not change the nature or character of the original claim.

JUDGMENT

ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J. - Present revisional application has been preferred by the petitioner Rahima Bibi under article 227 of the Constitution of India as she felt aggrieved by the order No. 14 dated 12.09.2018, passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) additional Court, Lalbagh, Murshidabad in Title Suit No. 165/2017. By the aforesaid impugned order, learned Trial Court was pleased to reject petitioners prayer for amendment of plaint.

2. Petitioners case in a nutshell is that petitioner as plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 165/2017 before the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lalbagh, Murshidabad contending that the schedule mentioned suit property was purchased by the defendant and while he was in possession of suit property, defendant had sold the same in favour of plaintiff Rahima Bibi by a registered deed dated 14.10.1991 and delivered possession in favour of plaintiff. Plaintiff after getting possession of the same, constructed tin shaded room and also planted various fruit bearing trees. Be it also mentioned that plaintiff had taken loan from bank of India for purchasing tractor by mortgaging the aforesaid deed dated 14.10.1991 to the bank. Further case of the plaintiff/petitioner herein is that she also acquired Title in the schedule mentioned suit property by way of adverse possession.

3. Since purchase plaintiff did not face any difficulty in possessing the schedule mentioned suit property, but on 01.06.2017 defendant /opposite party suddenly came to the suit property and declared that he had never sold schedule mentioned suit property in favour of plaintiff and accordingly he has evicted plaintiff from the said suit property. Plaintiff got astonished with this and after collecting copy of the said sale deed dated 14.10.1991, from the concerned bank, she came to know that due to mistake committed by deed writer, khatian No. has been erroneously written as 604 and plot No. has been wrongly written as 689, though it should have been written as khatian No. 88 and plot No. 604. at the time of the execution of the deed, no one had noticed aforesaid mistake and contents of the deed was never read over or explained to the parties and defendant on good faith had executed and registered the said deed. If the aforesaid mistake would have pointed out at the time of execution and registration of the deed, defendant would have certainly rectified the said mistake, which occurred due to inadvertence. accordingly plaintiff has given details of the said deed in 'Kha' schedule and stated that unless said mistake be rectified various future complications will arise and accordingly he has prayed for declaration of title in the schedule mentioned suit property and also for permanent injunction restraining defendant from disturbing plaintiffs possession in the suit property.

4. Defendants appeared in that suit and filed written statement. Defendant's specific case is that plaintiff is the elder sister of the defendant and suit plot, total measuring 62 satak, originally belonged to Subeda Bewa and while said Subeda Bewa was in possession of the suit property, she sold the same in favour of one Md. abdul Goni, abdul Sujant and Pentu Sk on 18.09.1974, through registered deed.

5. In view of said deed dated 18.09.1974 Pentu Sk became owner of 20 2/3(1/3rd of 62 satak) and while said Pentu Sk was in possession of the same, he had transferred the said property in favour of his wife Rijia Bibi by way of Hebanama deed dated 03.10.2016. The name of Rijia Bibi has been duly recorded in L.R. Record of Rights and said Rijia Bibi presently possessing the said plot of land peaceably, openly.

6. Defendant/opposite party herein categorically stated in his written statement that he never executed any deed in favour of plaintiff in connection with the suit plot on 14.10.1991 and practically the deed dated 14.10.1991 is a fraudulent deed obtained by way of the false personification and accordingly he has prayed for dismissal of the suit.

7.