IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CMP MO No. 135 of 2008 Date of decision July 18, 2008 __________________________________________________________ 1. CMP MO No. 135 of 2008 Naginder ….Petitioner. Versus Kanshi Ram ….Respondent. ___________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ CMP MO No. 135 of 2008 For the Petitioners: Shri Dalip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Shri S.D. Gill, Advocate __________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J. This is the plaintiff’s petition against the order passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Arki, Distt. Solan vide order dated 17.4.2008 dismissing an application under Order 6 rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by plaintiff claiming amendment of the fact that during the pendency of suit the defendant has taken forcible possession of the land. The learned trial Court was in clear error in prejudging the veracity of the allegations made by the plaintiff as to whether they were actually dispossessed or not. These are facts to be established by leading evidence on an 1 Whether reports of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 issue to be settled. No allegation made in an application can be prejudged in original proceedings unless a determination has been made on merits after recording the evidence etc. The learned Trial Court has adopted a very technical view of the matter. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is allowed. The order passed by learned trial Court is quashed and set aside. The amended plaint will be taken on record of the case and thereafter, the case shall proceed in accordance with law. July 11,2008 (Dev Darshan Sud), (ms) Judge