C.R. No. 5744 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 5744 of 2009 Date of Decision: October 14, 2009 Sat Parkash Bhalla …..Appellant Vs. Raj Kumar and others …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) In the garb of an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, the plaintiff- petitioner had sought to incorporate an additional plea on the basis of a fresh cause of action and to implead additional plaintiff No.2 i.e. Sathan Satti Mata (Deity) through himself after a gap of six years of filing of the initial suit. Vide impugned order the said application for amendment of plaint has been dismissed. C.R. No. 5744 of 2009 [2] Taking into consideration the stage of the case and other facts and circumstances, I do not find any impropriety in the impugned order. In case the amendment is allowed it will certainly change the nature of the suit and will set at naught all the proceedings which have already been undertaken by the trial Court. It is always open to the person which is sought to be added, to file a fresh suit on the basis of a cause of action which on the face of it, appears to be fresh. No ground is made out for interference. Dismissed. Dismissal of the application by the trial Court or dismissal of this revision petition will not prejudice the rights of the plaintiff to proceed in accordance with law on the basis of alleged fresh cause of action. October 14, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE