JUDGMENT

Raj Mohan Singh, J. - This revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 15.09.2015 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) Samana vide which the application filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint was dismissed.

2. At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 14.10.2015 following order was passed:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that in the suit for permanent injunction filed by the plaintiffspetitioners, pursuant to the sale deed dated 05.05.1989, the plaintiffs have led evidence by examining one Vimal Kumar Jain (PW-4), wherein he has specifically stated that the sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs was of 7 Marlas of land. He has also specified the boundaries of the plot. Sale deed has been exhibited as Ex.PW4/1. Pursuant to the sale deed (Annexure P-3), even if Khasra number has been mentioned in the plaint, the measurement of plot of 7 Marlas is required to be defined along with the boundaries and this amendment for correct decision of the suit could have been made at any stage of the trial.

Notice of motion for 19.11.2015. Passing of final order by the trial Court shall re