IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO 93 of 2010. Decided on August 6, 2010. Saran Dass & others …. Petitioners. Versus Raina ... Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Appellant Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents Mr. Vikrant Chandel, Advocate vice Ms. Archna Dutt, Advocate. Surjit Singh, Judge (Oral). Respondent plaintiff has filed a suit, claiming that he being a tenant, has acquired ownership of suit land by virtue of the provisions of H.P.Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. 2. The suit has been contested by the petitioners-defendants who claim that ownership vest in them. Trial Court has decreed the suit of the respondent. Petitioners have filed an appeal in the Court of District Judge. During the pendency of the appeal, they filed an application to amend the written statement to raise the plea, explaining how they happen to be the owners of the suit land. They wants Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - to plead that they purchased 1/6th share from one Nathu and 1/3rd share, they were already having, as per Jamabandi for the year 1944-45. That application for amendment has been dismissed. 3. I am of the view that amendment, if allowed, will avoid multiplicity of litigation. Therefore, the amendment is allowed, subject to costs of Rs.2000/-. Petition is disposed of accordingly. 4. Pending application(s) if any, stands disposed of, having become infructuous. August 6, 2010 (HL). (Surjit Singh), J.