1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. By the impugned order, an application for amendment of the plaint in the suit filed by the plaintiff/revisionist petitioner was rejected.

3. The rejection was primarily on two grounds – first, that no plausible explanation for the delay of about ten years in filing the amendment application was furnished; secondly, that the relief sought to be introduced by way of the amendment was time-barred.

4. As per the pleadings sought to be incorporated by virtue of the amendment application, on August 7, 2015, that is, almost ten years prior to the making of the amendment application, the defendant nos. 1 to 5 had allegedly come to the suit land and made one tin shed structure by four cemented pillars and two bamboo poles as well as fixed a signboard displaying the name of Bhaktinagar Netaji Youth Club on the pillar. As per the said proposed amended pleadings, the defendants had also kept two ‘Rath’s (thela gari) on the suit