Amendments of pleadings are allowed only if they clarify existing issues without altering the suit's nature, and must be pursued with diligence to avoid disadvantaging the opposing party.

JUDGMENT

1. This instant revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing/canceling/setting aside the order dated 06.04.2022 in Civil Misc, Case No.09 of 2021 in T.S.157 of 2016 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khowai, Tripura.

2. The fact of the case in brief is that, the petitioner being the plaintiff filed the T.S. Suit No.157 of 2016 against the respondents for confirmation of title over the suit land, described in the plaint and inter alia for recovery of the khash possession of the suit land by evicting the defendants and his agents. The respondents herein being the defendants in the suit had appeared and joined the trial of the case and filed their written statement.

3. At that stage, it was noticed by the plaintiff-petitioner that the plaint contains certain typographical mistakes in terms of numerical figures i.e., in Para-9, 11 & 12 of the plaint a date (all are of same) has been printed out wrongly. It has been typed as 30.09.2014' though it would be 30.12.2015'. Similarly in the same way, due to typographical mistake/error and/or oversight in the schedule of the suit land, in page-7 of the plaint, in 1st line, 10' Gandas has been typed, thought it would be 5' Gandas. As such the petitioner applied for amendment of the plaint on 24.02.2021. The said application for amendment of the plaint was registered as Misc No.09 of 2021. The defendant-respondents submitted their written objection resisting the prayer of the petitioner for amendment of the plaint.

4. The aforesaid application for amendment of the plaint was heard by the learned Trial Judge and ultimately by an order dated 06.04.2022, the learned Trial Judge rejected the said prayer for amendment solely on the ground that there was delay in filing the application.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order dated 06.04.2022 passed in Misc. Case No.09 of 2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khowai, this instant revision petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

'i) Admit this revision petition;

ii) Issue a Rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the ld. Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khowai, in connection with the Case No. Civil Misc.09/2021 in connection with T.S. 157 of 2016, shall not be quashed/set aside, for the fair ends of justice.

iii) Call for the records pertaining to the Case No. Civil Misc.09/2021 in connection with T.S.157 of 2016 pending before the ld. Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khowai, Tripura;

iv) In the ad-interim pass an order staying the further proceeding of Title Suit Case No.157 of 2016, pending before the Ld. Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khowai, Tripura, till disposal of the instant revision petition, for the fair ends of justice.

v) After hearing the parties may please to quash, set aside the impugned order dated 06.04.2022 passed by the learned Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khowai, Tripura in connection with the Case No. Civil Misc.09/2021 in connection with T.S.157 of 2016, for the fair ends of justice.

vi) After hearing the parties may please to make the Rule absolute in terms of prayer No.(i) &(iv), cited above;

vi) Pass any other or order or orders granting relief(s) in favour of your humble petitioner as to this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.'

6. Heard Mr. B.N. Majumder, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. B. Paul, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. N. Chowdhury, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 & 2, and Ms. R. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3.

7. Mr. B.N. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the amendment petition preferred in the Court below was not for the insertion of new facts or evidence which would surprise the defendant rather, it was only for the correction of some numerical figures i.e., in Para-9, 11 & 12 of the plaint a date (all ar