Point of Law: Principle applicable for deciding application made for amendment in pleadings remains no more res integra.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 26.12.2019, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division-1), Shimla, H.P., whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC, having been filed by the petitioner-plaintiff for amendment of the plaint came to be dismissed, plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, praying therein to set-aside aforesaid impugned order and thereafter, allow the application for amendment.

2. Precisely, the facts of the case are that plaintiff filed suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in the peaceful possession of the land comprised in khewat No. 39/94 min, Khatauni No. 174, khasra No. 1592, 1593 and 1915 situate at Mohal Vikas Nagar, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, in any manner whatsoever, without due process of law. Plaintiff averred in the suit that he had purchased the suit land/structure from its previous owner as he was already having physical possession of the land/structure constructed in the aforesaid khasra numbers as tenant under the previous owners Anil, Punam and Jamna Devi since long and is still occupying the same as owner after its purchase.

3. Aforesaid case set up by the plaintiff came to be refuted by the respondents by way of written statement, wherein they pleaded that neither plaintiff nor his predecessor in interest was in possession of the suit land and it was joint between the co-sharers.

4. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, plaintiff filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, praying therein amendment of the plaint with a view to place on record certain facts, which may be relevant for proper adjudication of the controversy.

5. While filing reply to the aforesaid application, respondents sought dismissal of the application on the ground that same has been filed at the belated stage and amendment, if permitted, would change the entire complexion of the suit.

6. Learned trial court on the basis of pleadings adduced on record in the application, dismissed the same. In the aforesaid background, plaintiff has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein to set-aside the aforesaid order.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record especially, application for amendment, this Court finds that plaintiff intended to place on record certain facts, which as per him, took place after filing of the plaint. In the application, he alleged that Smt. Darshanu had filed an application before Settlement Collector, Shimla, for recording her possession over khasra No. 1952, which was allowed, as a result, she wrongly came to be recorded in possession of aforementioned khasra number. He alleged that in the revenue record pertaining to year 2006-07, person namely Vishwajit and Vishal are shown to be in possession of khasra Nos. 1592, 1593 and 1915 and plaintiff has been wrongly shown to be in possession of khasra No. 1587 of the late Smt. Darshnoo. He alleged that since aforesaid change in the revenue record has been made in violation of rules of Land Record Manual, coupled with the fact that applicant has filed the application for correction of entry of the revenue record, which is pending adjudication before the Tehsildar, suit having been filed by him needs to be amended as per details given in the application. In the application, plaintiff also alleged that he has come to know that vide mutation No. 671 dated 20.8.2010, some oral exchange has taken place between late Smt. Darshnoo and Sh. Krishan Lal i.e. defendnat No.1 and since now, Krishan Lal is threatening to dispossess the applicant from khasra No. 1915, prayer made on his behalf for amendment of the plaint, needs to be allowed. Plaintiff alleged that Krishan Lal had also filed three separate applications for partition of the suit land having No. 81-IX of 2015, 82-IX of 2015 and 83-IX of