IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R.No.4856 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 4.8.2010 Munsi and others ....Petitioners Versus Nanak Singh ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Ashok Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. There is no legal infirmity in the impugned order. The grievance of the petitioners is that the amendment has been allowed at a belated stage and the same would have the effect of enlargement of the limitation as the relinquishment deed could not have been challenged by the respondent by way of this amendment in the suit at the evidence stage. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the petition is without any merit. The question of enlargement of limitation, which is the cause of grievance to the petitioners, is always determined on the basis of the facts of the case. The respondent could have got the benefit of limitation in the eventuality of his satisfying the conscience of the court that he had acquired the knowledge subsequently and he cannot be disentitled to the benefit of amendment of pleadings on this ground. Learned trial C.R.No.4856 of 2010 (O&M) -2- Court has therefore rightly permitted the respondent to make the amendment in the pleadings. No prejudice is caused to the petitioners and noticing the fact that the law of amendment of pleadings is very liberal, the order of the trial court which has appreciated the facts in the right perspective does not warrant any interference. Dismissed. 4.8.2010 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss