Amendments to pleadings must not change the fundamental character of the suit and should be sought with due diligence; otherwise, they may be rejected.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

Heard Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Rishav Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 and Mr. Sagar Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos.5 to 6.

2. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court has dispensed with the notice upon opposite party Nos.7 to 12 in view of the fact that they are said to be the proforma opposite parties.

3. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside of the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by learned Sr. Civil Judge-II (Sr. Division), Dumka in connection with Original Suit No.15 of 2019 by which the learned Court has been pleased to reject the petition filed by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC for amendment.

4. Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the Original Suit No.15 of 2019 was instituted for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from illegally, unlawfully unauthorizedly and forcibly disposing the plaintiffs name from the Schedule ‘B’ i.e. suit property. He submits that the defendants have appeared on notice and filed their written statement and in the meantime a petition under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC for amendment was filed by the petitioner herein and amendment was sought in the prayer portion by inserting a few words and the line “for the cancellation of aforesaid sale deed” in the body of the plaint as follows :-

(I) That in eight line at page No.4 of the plaint, after the words “suit property” and before the word “suit value” the word “and for the cancellation of two sale deed No.440 of 2016 and 444 of 2016 be added.

(II) That in the last line of paragraph No.12 of the plaint after word “the plaintiff” the word “so both the sale deed No.440 of 2016 and 444 of 2016 are liable to be cancelled and proforma defendant No.6 is not the owner of suit property rather the same stood recorded in the name of Bajnath Lath as he is the owner”.

(III) That the relief portion after para – a sub para no. “a” that a decree for cancellation of the registered sale deed No.440 for 2016 and 444 of 2016 be also passed in favour of the plaintiff.

(IV) That in relief portion another Para No.a2 be substituted as that a decree for confirmation of possession be also passed in favour of the plaintiffs and against the defendants in respect of tenanted premises of the plaintiffs. Therefore, prayed to allow the said amendment petition. He further submits that by the impugned order, the learned Court has rejected the same petition without considering the parameters of Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC. He then submits that the suit premises was sold by defendant No.6 to defendant Nos.1, 2, 3 and 4 and in view of that the petition was filed and even if the petitioners are the tenant he has got right to challenge the same. He submits that the law is well settled with regard to the amendment petition and the Courts are very lenient in allowing the formal amendment. On this ground, he submits that the same may kindly be set aside.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Rishav Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party Nos.1 to 4 submits that the suit was for permanent injunction instituted by the petitioners herein, who is the tenant in the suit premises. He submits that it was in the knowledge of the petitioners of selling about the sale deeds which has been disclosed in the plaint and even the deed number and date of registration is also disclosed and further the certified copy has been obtained on 26.04.2019 in spite of that the prayer in the main suit was not there and the amendment was sought after three years. He submits that the suit was instituted in the year 2019 whereas amendment petition was filed on 29.09.2023. He further submits in view of this fact itself the learned Court has rightly passed the order and if the said prayer is allowed the entire nature of the suit will change. He draws the attention of the Cour