CM No.8378-CII-2010 and -1- CR No.2200 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CM No.8378-CII-2010 and CR No.2200 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: 01.04.2010 **** Gurdev Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Satpal Singh and another . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: - Mr.G.S. Nagra, Advocate for the petitioner. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. (ORAL) CM No.8378-CII-2010 Allowed as prayed for. CR No.2200 of 2010 This revision petition is directed against order dated 23.2.2010 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Ajnala, whereby, an application filed under Section 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) for amendment of the plaint to the effect that the plaintiff has been dispossessed during the pendency of the suit and he wanted to make an averment in this regard and also wanted to amend the plaint to seek decree of possession. The learned trial Court dismissed the application only on the ground that the petitioner, who had filed an application for temporary injunction in the main suit for permanent injunction, could not succeed as he could not prove his CM No.8378-CII-2010 and -2- CR No.2200 of 2010 possession from the time he had filed the suit. Learned trial Court has also observed that in the application for amendment, the petitioner has not disclosed date, month or time when he was allegedly dispossessed by the defendants. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any error in the order of the learned Civil Court, therefore, the present revision petition is dismissed. However, petitioner shall be at liberty to withdraw the suit and file thereof suit for possession, if so advised. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) April 01, 2010 JUDGE Vivek