IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision :02.04.2026 NIRANJAN SINGH AND ANR ... PETITIONERS VERSUS BALWINDER SINGH ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARMOD GOYAL Present: Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the petitioners.

****

PARMOD GOYAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioners– defendants under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the impugned order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-8), passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, whereby the application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, 1908 for amendment of the plaint, filed by the respondent–plaintiff, has been allowed.

2. It is the case of the petitioners–defendants that, vide impugned order dated 04.02.2026, the respondent–plaintiff has been permitted to set up an entirely new case, which is not permissible in law. It is contended that the amendment so allowed is legally impermissible and travels beyond the scope of the original pleadings.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners–defendants has referred to page No. 17 of the paper book, wherein the relief originally sought by the respondent–

plaintiff against the petitioners–defendan