SBCMISC.APPLICATION NO.68/2008 IN SBCWP NO.7758/2007 – M/S ADINATH TEXTILE V/S SMT. KHATUN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.2.7.2008 1/3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6942/2005 Rajendra Prasad versus The Civil Judge (S.D.), Ratangarh and another. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.A.K.Khatri, for the petitioner. Mr.Pawan Ojha on behalf of Mr.S.G.Ojha, for the respondents. . DATE OF ORDE : 25th July, 2008. JUDGMENT 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is directed against the order dtd.19.9.2005 whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. filed by the plaintiff seeking amendment in SBCMISC.APPLICATION NO.68/2008 IN SBCWP NO.7758/2007 – M/S ADINATH TEXTILE V/S SMT. KHATUN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.2.7.2008 2/3 his plaint. The plaintiff wanted to add para 3, 4, and 5 in the plaint and para No.6, 7 and 8 for minor corrections in the plaint. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that defendant No.2 was the son of the defendant No.1 Mohan Lal, who expired during the pendency of the suit and one of the grounds of eviction was subletting by the father to the son, namely defendant No.1 to defendant No.2. After the death of defendant no.1 he prayed for amendment in the plaint to treat the defendant no.2 as main tenant . This amendment has been refused by the learned trial Court on the ground that after the death of defendant No.1, son alone remained in the suit shop and allowing such amendment would do away with the ground of subletting which the plaintiff had taken. This Court finds no error in the said part of the order of the learned trial Court. 4. Other para No.5 which the plaintiff wanted to add in the plaint is about personal bonafide necessity of the suit premises in view of the subsequent development in the form of repair and renovation of Dharmshala in question and for keeping a chowkidar/ Munik in the said Dharmshala, the said suit premises were required by the plaintiff. SBCMISC.APPLICATION NO.68/2008 IN SBCWP NO.7758/2007 – M/S ADINATH TEXTILE V/S SMT. KHATUN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.2.7.2008 3/3 For incorporating that in the plaint, para 5 was sought to be added in the plaint. This amendment has also been refused by the learned trial Court. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court has erred in refusing amendment by way of incorporating para 5 in the plaint regarding personal and bonafide necessity of the plaintiff. 6. Accordingly this writ petition is partly allowed and the plaintiff is permitted to add para 5 regarding personal and bonafide necessity in the plaint. No order as to costs. (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J. Item No.52 Ss/-