S. P. SRIVASTAVA, J.

( 1 ) -FEELING aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the trial court rejecting her application for amending the plaint by incorporating therein the proposed amendments she has now approached this court seeking redress praying for the reversal of the impugned order.

( 2 ) HEARD the learned counsel for the ap-plicantas well as learned counsel representing the contesting respondents and perused the record.

( 3 ) THE brief facts, shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of this revision lie in a narrow compass. The suit giving rise to the impugned order had been filed by the plaintiff-applicant in the year 1990 praying for a decree of declaration in respect of her title to the agricultural holdings in suit as well as a decree or permanent prohibitory injunction.

( 4 ) DURING the pendency of the suit an application dated 11. 2. 1997 was filed by the plaintiff seeking permission to amend the plaint by incorporating therein paragraph 4 (a) and an additional relief. In the proposed paragraph 4 (a) the plaintiff had asserted that the decree dated 28. 7,1983 passed in Vaijanti and Ors. v. Banwari and Ors. , by the Civil Judge, Class II. Joura, was illegal bein

Click Here to Read the rest of this document