IMPORTANT POINT
[The court established that amendments to pleadings under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC can be allowed at any stage of the proceedings, provided they do not change the fundamental nature of the suit and are necessary for the proper adjudication of the case.]

JUDGMENT :

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the Addl. Munsif-XX, Giridih in Original Suit No.167 of 1999, whereby and whereunder, the amendment petition filed under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC seeking amendment in the plaint, has been allowed.

2. The brief fact of the case as per the pleading made in the petition, which requires to be enumerated, which reads as under:-

3. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is one of the defendants of the Original Suit No. 167 of 1999 and on receipt of notice had appeared in this case and filed written statement jointly with the other defendants stating therein that the defendants are having right, title, interest and possession over the suit property and plaintiffs have no knowledge of the lands in question and the plaintiffs are claiming the lands by virtue of the forged paper and hence, the defendants prayed for dismissal of the suit and also stating therein that the present suit is barred by law of limitation and adverse possession and the suit is also barred under sections 34 and 42 of the Specific Relief Act and State is also necessary party in the present suit.

4. The value of the suit property is not less than Rs10 lacs and as such, the trial court has got no pecuniary jurisdiction to try the present suit because the plaintiffs have shown the suit land in schedule 'C' and 'D' very cleverly only with a view to save the court fee but if the entire contents of the plaint, will be perused, it is clear that plaintiffs want to get the declaration for schedule 'A' lands, i.e., for an area of 8.40 acres and also for schedule 'B' lands for an area of 2 acres. The lands of the defendants, an area of 9.65 acres, which is the settled lands of the sons of Ahali Mian and also the settled lands of the sons of Sizman Mian by virtue of Bhudan Parcha, which was made in the year of 1956. Sons of Ahali Mian got 3.25 acres of land from Bhudan Purcha and sons of Sizman Mian got 6.40 acres of land from Bhudan Yagya Committee and both the lands amalgamated in one block within specific boundary and came in joint possession over the lands and after settlement the defendants divided the same into Dhankhets about 36 topras and 7 topras of tand land and the said tand land is under the process of reclamation and the said Dhankhets had been converted into two classes of paddy fields and same can be verified by the appointment of Survey knowing Commissioner.

5. It is the further case that the present suit has been filed in the year 1999 and after 21 years the plaintiffs filed a petition under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C on 17.02.2020 for amendment of the plaint in several manner on the ground old CPC was amended on or about 22.06.2002, which came into operation w.e.f. 01.07.2002, hence, the plaintiffs prayed for several amendments in the plaint.

6. The defendants have also filed rejoinder on 06.07.2022 to the petition dated 13.02.2020 filed by the plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C stating therein the aforesaid petition is illegal, not maintainable and is liable to be rejected.

7. When the suit was filed, plaintiffs had knowledge that in Zamabandi Cancellation Revision No. 46 of 1996, the learned Court of Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh passed order on 16.08.1999 and set aside the order of learned court of Additional Collector, Giridih in spite of the plaintiffs did not challenge the said impugned order. The case is at the final stage and if such type of time barred amendments will be allowed, it will amount to reopen the case starting to denovo trial of the suit and nature and character of the suit will be changed, thereby the defendants prayed for dismissal of the petition for amendments filed by the plaintiffs dated 13.02.2020. It is needed to mention here that in the present Title Suit No. 167 of 1999 witnesses from both sides have already been examined and c