IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.3792 of 2007 Date of Decision:- 28.04.2008 Ved Prakash ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.N.D.Achint, Advocate vs. Ranbir Singh etc. ....Respondent(s) through Mr.Ashok Tyagi, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This civil revision is directed against the order dated 16.5.2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Division), Gurgaon whereby the petitioner's application for amendment of the plaint or alternatively to permit him to withdraw the present suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action has been dismissed. The parties are real brothers. There appears to be dispute between them in respect of various properties claimed to be joint properties of the family. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner wanted to amend the same so as to incorporate some other properties which were earlier left out by him. Alternatively, he sought permission to withdraw the present suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action. The second C.R. No.3792 of 2007 -2- relief has been declined to him on the ground that the suit for partition which he intends to file would be based upon a new cause of action, therefore, permission cannot be granted to him to file another suit on the same cause of action as pleaded in the present suit. Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, learned counsel for the parties have been heard. In my considered view, once the learned Civil Court has found that the proposed fresh suit by the petitioner is for partition and would be based upon an entire different cause of action, the petitioner could well be permitted to withdraw the present suit with a clarification that the withdrawal thereof shall not be taken as a bar under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC qua the maintainability of the second suit. With this clarification, the impugned order is modified. Disposed of. April 28, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE