IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.593 of 2009 Date of decision : March 12, 2010 Hanif Mohammed and another …Petitioners. Versus Ranbir Singh and another …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjeev Kuthiala, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.1. Mr. Harmeet Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. A suit has been filed by the respondent, claiming himself to be the owner of certain property, which was at one point of time recorded in the ownership of the petitioner in the revenue papers. During the course of trial, some judgments have been proved on record by the respondent, in which he has been held to be the owner of the suit property. 3. Defendant-petitioner filed an application, under Section 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking leave to amend the written statement, so as to assail those Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… judgments and the changes brought about in the revenue papers, on the basis of those judgments, on the plea that he was not party to the litigation in which those judgments had been rendered. That application has been dismissed. 4. Plea sought to be introduced by the defendant- petitioner, by way of amendment, is a legal plea. Pleadings are not supposed to contain averments assailing the evidence that is led or may be led by the opponent. Evidence is controverted by leading evidence and where evidence is led, which is not relevant, the party against whom that evidence is led can always argue that the evidence being not relevant cannot be looked into. In any case, defendant-petitioner can always argue that he being not a party to the litigation, in which the judgments were rendered, the same do not affect his rights and similarly changes brought about in the revenue papers, on the strength of those judgments, are of no significance, irrespective of the fact whether such judgments have been assailed or not in its pleadings. 5. In view of the abovestated position, petition is dismissed. Record of the trial Court be returned, with a copy of this order. Parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 5th April, 2010. March 12, 2010(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J