IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.321 of 2010 Date of decision: 1.11.2010 Tara …. Petitioner Versus Sh.Uttam Chand & anr. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioners: Mr.Ajay Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Ajit Saklani, Advocate. _____________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 1.6.2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kullu whereby the application filed by the petitioner for amendment of the plaint was rejected. 2. In the original plaint, an allegation was made that Smt.Lesari had settled with one Sharnu of Village “Bhullang”. By way of amendment, all that is sought to be amended is that the word “Bhullang” is sought to be replaced by the word “Pullag”. The amendment does not in any way raises new plea nor 2 does it change the nature of the suit. In fact, no witnesses have been examined till date. True it is, that after framing of issues, it may be stated that the trial has commenced but this amendment is not of such a nature that it raises a new plea which was available to the plaintiff. Only the description of the person with whom Smt.Lesari had allegedly settled down is changed. Instead of showing him to be resident of village “Bhullang” it is now given as village Pullag. The learned Trial Court in my view has taken a very hyper- technical view of the matter. I therefore, allow the petition and permit the plaintiff to amend the plaint, as aforesaid. No order as to costs. November 1, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) (m) Judge