C.R. NO. 7315 OF 2009(o & m) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. NO. 7315 OF 2009 (o & m) DECIDED ON : 10.12.2009 Ajmer Singh ...Petitioner versus M/S Faqir Chand Vas Dev and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present : Mr. G. P. S. Bal, Advocate, for the petitioner. SABINA, J. (ORAL) The plaintiff-respondent No.1 has filed a suit for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit land illegally and forcibly. During the pendency of the suit, an application has been filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for amendment of the plaint. Vide the impugned order, the said application was allowed. Hence, the present revision petition. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition is devoid of any merit and deserves dismissal. C.R. NO. 7315 OF 2009(o & m) -2- Admittedly, a reference has been made in the plaint with regard to electric connection and telephone connection installed in the suit premises. By way of amendment, the plaintiff wants to correct the electric connection number and he wants to delete the words “telephone connection was installed in the suit premises”. The plaintiff further wants to add the subsequent event regarding registration of FIR against defendant No.1. Thus, the plaintiff wants to make correction in the electric connection number and wants to delete the telephone number which he had wrongly mentioned in the plaint. The learned trial Court rightly observed that at this stage, the Court was not to decide whether the wrong facts mentioned in the plaint were bona fide or were with a mala fide intention. At this stage, the plaintiff merely sought to make correction of mistakes in the plaint which were liable to be allowed. The registration of FIR is a subsequent event and moreover, the addition of the factum of registration of criminal case has not been opposed by learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of arguments. The impugned order of the trial Court does not suffer from any material illegality or irregularity, warranting interference by this Court. Dismissed. DECEMBER 10, 2009 (SABINA) shalini JUDGE