IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR NO.2133/2009 Date of Decision:21.4.2009. Tek Singh ..........Petitioner. Versus Narottam Singh and another ..........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present: Mr. Ram Kumar Chauhan,Advocate for the petitioner. JASWANT SINGH,J Petitioner-plaintiff has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 17.2.2009 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, dismissing his application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, filed at the appellate stage, seeking amendment of his written statement to the counter claim of defendants so as to give up the plea of adverse possession, originally taken in a suit for permanent injunction filed by him for restraining the respondents-defendants from interfering in his peaceful possession over the house in dispute. In the suit the petitioner-plaintiff took the plea that he was owner in possession of the house,which he had constructed over the land which was lying abandoned in the year 1947. Respondents-defendants contested the suit stating that the disputed house, jointly owned by Jarnail Singh @ Ajaib Singh, Karnail Singh and Tara Singh, by way of a family settlement dated 7.7.1982 fell to the share of Tara CR NO.2133/2009 2 Singh, uncle of plaintiff and defendant no.2, who took possession thereof on 9.7.1982. Tara Singh died on 27.3.1996 leaving behind a Will in respect of disputed house in favour of Narottam Singh-defendant no.1. It was alleged that plaintiff-petitioner during rainy season of 1995, took keys of the disputed house from his brother defendant no.2-Malkiat Singh on the pretext that roofs of his own house were leaking and as such he had not place to take shelter. Defendant no.2 being the real brother of plaintiff handed over the keys of the disputed house to the latter. Respondents-defendants also filed counter claim seeking relief of mandatory injunction for directing the plaintiff-petitioner to hand over the keys/ vacant possession of the house in dispute to them. In the written statement to this counter claim, the petitioner-plaintiff took the plea that he had become owner of the house in dispute by way of adverse possession. A perusal of the impugned order also reveals that one Jasbir Kaur claiming herself to be the wife of deceased Tara Singh- who allegedly executed a Will in respect of the disputed house in favour of Narottam Singh defendant no.1- filed a suit for declaration in respect of the disputed house as well as other property owned deceased Tara Singh. Petitioner Tek Singh, defendants 1 and 2 namely Narottam Singh and Malkiat Singh were parties4 to the said suit. Even petitioner-plaintiff Tek Chand in that suit had also taken the plea of adverse possession. The said suit was dismissed by the learned trial Court. Jasbir Kaur as well as petitioner-plaintiff, both preferred appeals. Both the appeal were dismissed by the appellate Court. Thus the plea of adverse possession taken by Tek Chand petitioner-plaintiff, in that suit as well as CR NO.2133/2009 3 appeal stood rejected by the trial court as well as appellate court. It is not the case of the petitioner-plaintiff that against the said judgements and decrees of the trial court/appellate court he preferred any appeal. The present appeal was filed on 8.12.2000 against the judgement and decree dated 8.11.2000 passed by the trial Court. The petitioner-plaintiff moved the application for amendment of the written statement in the year 2008. The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to show (i) as to why the amendment was not sought during the pendency of the suit (ii) why petitioner-plaintiff took 8 long years to move the application for amendment of the written statement and how amendment at appellate stage is permissible once the rights inter se parties have been determined by the trial Court. For the reasons stated above,finding no merit in this revision petition the same is hereby dismissed in limine. 21.4.2009. (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge