g 'br i u UNDER ARTICLE 226t227 OF THE CONSTITUTION WRIT PETITION OF INDIA. (SB :Hon’ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Presen one f0: the pet1t1oners t N Akml Agrawai PL for the State/iesponuent No 7 None for the respondents No 1 to 6 ORDER \ 7.. (Passed on 22/11/2011) 1. Petition and order dated 18/8] 2004 passed by lat Additional District Judge, Mahasamund in civil appeal No. 34A] 2002 whereby application for arnendment in plaint filed on behalf of the petitioners has been dismissed. Order and decree dated 2/7/02 HIGH COURT $F CHHATTESGARH AT BELASPUR ERR NO 3i53 61* 2G04 w Sari Petitioner 1. Sukhdso Sahu S‘fo Kanhaiyalal Plaintiffs Sahu Aged about 55 years R/o Villag€ Machewa Patwari Halka No. 143, Distt. Mahasamund 2. Smtv Chandn'ka Sahu, W/o Sukhdeo Sahu, Aged about 42 yuears, R/o Village Machewa, ~ Patwan‘ Halka No, 143, Distt. Mahasamund. Versus Resgeadents 1. Ashok Kumar, S/o Jhumuklal, DEf€ndants Aged about 29 years, Caste: Namdeo, R/o Gerudpara’ Distt. Mahasamund 2. Santoshi D/o Jhumuklal, Aged about 24 yeam, C/o Dinesh Kumar Verma, Soda Factoty, Purani Basti Kantabhanji, Distt. Balangir(0rissa) 3. Parvati D/o Jhumuklal, aged " about 27 years, R/o Near Ganesh Hotel Ramnagar Raipur Distt. Reign 4. Mohanlal, Sjo Jhumuklal, aged. about 50 years '5. Tikam S/o Jhumuklal, aged about 48 years 6. Bihari, S/o Jhumuklal, aged about 40 years {$1. No. 4, 5 8n 6 axe msiaents of Gudaxpara, Distt. Mahasamund) 7.. State of Chhattisgarh, Thmugh Collector, Distt. Mahasajlund. 8. 1st Additional District Judge, Distt. Mahasamund. xoq/ passed by First Civil Judge Class—2, Mahasamund in civil suit No. 21Ai 2002, subject mater of appeal whereby suit filed on behalf of the petitioners has been dismissed under Order '7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (in short ‘the Code’) perused. During pendeucy of appeal against judgment and decree of dismissal of suit under Onler 7 Rule 11 of the Code petitioners have filed application for amendment in plajnt under Cider 6 Rule 17 of the Code, aner hearing the parties l“ Additional District Judge, Mahasamund has dismissed the application and adjourned the appeal for final heaiing. Lower Appellate Couit was under obligation to decide the application for amendment of plajnt or Wlitten statement at the time of final order/judgment and not during pendency of such appeal. Both the parties were also under obligation to make submission on such application at the time of hnal argument but by making submission by parties and passing the Cider both the parties and 15‘ Additional District Judge, Mahasamund has committed an illegality. Consequently, petition is allowed and order dated 18/8/ 2004 to the extent of dismissal of application hled under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code is hereby set~ aside. Court below shall hear the appeal final along with application med under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code for amendment in plaint and pass the order/judgment afresh. Matter is pending since 2004, Court below is directed to decide the appeal as early as possible prefembiy within 4 months. Main ’ T.P. Sharma Ilas Judge / ; sw-