473 4 le CivilRevision Noe2311 of 2011 10SM1s IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNOAB S HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH eee Date of Decisionl AprilO 2011 1 1 l Civil Revision Noe2311 of 2011 l08M1e 0 0 Jathedar Baba Balbir Singh Akali Petitioner I VERSUS Z Shiromani Panth Akali Budha Dal Panjwan Takhat and others Respondents 0 CORAM HONBLE MR3USTICE MOHINDER PAL I Z 1 1 Whether Reportersof Local papers may be allowed to see 4 the judgment7 V Z 2 To be referred to the Reporters or not7 ll 3e Whether the judgmentshouid be reportedin the Digest7 epresentl Mr VijaySharma Advocate for the petitioner MOHINDER PALy J The defendantepeUoner IS aggrieved against the order passed by the trial Court whereby the prayer of the Rashmi 2013.01.18 13: 03 True Scanned Copy Of the Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 474 1 e 4 Civil Revision Noa2311 of 2011 l08M1e for amendment of the suit filed by them plaintiffsrespondentslfor declaration in respectof the property in dispute has been allowed After hearing the Iearned counsel for the petitionerand 1 perusingthe impugnedorder I do not see any reason warranting C interference in the impugnedorder passed by the Iearned trial 0 0 Judge The trial of the suit has not yet commenced By way 9 of amendment the inter aiia incorporated C5 their plea in the plaint qua ownership and possessionofthe suit property by chaliengingthe Will dated 1 162007 allegedly Z 2 executed by Santa Singldeceasedl which has been propounded C4 by the defendantpetitionerand the revenue entry on the basis of I said Will Eariier the had challengedthe l3 Z revenue record incorporated on the basis of the said Will which 0 relief of course IS ancilIarYe If the counsei for the plaintiff respondentsfor one reason or the other failed to challengethe Will 7 Z Ill question which is the main relief Ill the original plaint the plaintiffscannot be made to suffer especiallywhen the trial of the suit has not as yet commenced Another amendment allowed by the trial Court is with regardto the factum of General Power of Attorney dated 1352010 having been executed during the pendencyof the suit Itl favour of Baba DayalSingh throughwhom the instant suit has been filed No prejudicehas been caused to the defendantoetitioner if amendment in regard thereto inthe plaint has been allowed by the trial Court Rashmi 2013.01.18 13: 03 True Scanned Copy Of the Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 475 1 4 e3e CivilRevision No311 of 2011 OSMle Resultantly this revision petitionIS herebydismissed being without any merit 1 April 2011 JUDGE 1 ak 1 rl 0 0 I Z 2 L I L3 Z e 00 mm Z m 4 Rashmi 2013.01.18 13: 03 True Scanned Copy Of the Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document