Civil Revision No. 6018 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6018 of 2010 Date of Decision: 20.4.2011 *** Harblas Singh & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. Gram Panchayat & Ors. .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present:- Mr. Abhinav Oberoi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. I.S. Sidhu, Advocate for respondents No.3 & 4. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioners-plaintiffs are aggrieved with order dated 11.8.2010 by virtue of which their application for amendment of plaint under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has been dismissed. Heard. The suit filed by the plaintiffs is for permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from interfering in their peaceful possession by constructing the metalled road on the land, detailed in the head note of the plaint. However, with the proposed amendment they sought to incorporate the prayer for grant of mandatory injunction directing the defendants to remove the road constructed on the land in dispute, during the pendency of the suit, at their own costs and also sought to incorporate such facts in the body of the plaint. Admittedly, at the time of filing of the suit, the grouse of the plaintiffs was with regard to restraining of defendants from constructing the road. The said suit was filed in the year 2004 and on 13.12.2004 an injunction order was passed in their favour. But without asserting as to when the defendants constructed the road on their land, the aforesaid applicationi for amendment was filed by the plaintiffs. Admittedly, no Civil Revision No. 6018 of 2010 2 contempt proceedings for violation of any injunction order was filed by the plaintiffs and hence, it was rightly observed that the proposed amendment will entirely change the nature of the suit, which is not permissible as per law. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The revision petition, being without merit, is accordingly dismissed. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE April 20 , 2011 Jiten