C.R. No. 4896 of 2009 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 4896 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 28.8.2009 Krishna Devi & another .......... Petitioners Vs Narsi & others ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) C.M. No. 20340-CII of 2009 This is an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for exemption from filing of typed / certified copies of Annexures P-1 to P-7 and to place on record true and correct copies thereof. For the reasons stated in the application, C.M. is allowed as prayed for. C. R. No. 4896 of 2009 This revision petition is directed against the order dated 18.12.2007, passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Karnal vide which application moved by the plaintiff / respondent for amendment of the plaint in appeal, has been allowed. The plaintiff / respondent had filed a suit for possession by claiming himself to be the owner of the suit property. The basis of suit was, C.R. No. 4896 of 2009 2 that in the earlier suit filed by plaintiff, plaintiff and defendants were legal heirs to inherit the property being daughters of Phoola Ram. The suit was decreed. The respondent Narsi filed an appeal. It is during the pendency of the appeal, plaintiff / respondent sought amendment to claim, that the actual land which is left was 169K-3M and necessary amendment is required to be made to correct the area of the land. He further sought impleadment of the petitioners herein as defendants in the suit on the plea, that Narsi had transferred part of the property by way of decree in favour of the petitioners and others. The amendment stands allowed. The learned counsel for the petitioners is aggrieved by the fact, that after allowing the amendment the learned lower appellate Court fixed the appeal for final arguments. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, is that once the petitioners have been impleaded as a party on an application moved by the plaintiff / respondents, they have a right to contest the suit to protect their rights in the land. This plea of the learned counsel for the petitioners deserves to be rejected for the reason, that the petitioners have not approached the learned lower appellate Court. Once the petitioners have been impleaded as party for the first time, they have a right under law to contest the suit by filing the written statement and lead evidence. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of what has been stated above, wishes to withdraw this revision petition to approach the C.R. No. 4896 of 2009 3 learned Lower appellate Court with a request to file the written statement on the date to be fixed by the learned appellate Court. Prayer is allowed. Dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioners are given liberty to approach the learned lower appellate Court for filing written statement to the plaint. 28.8.2009 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) 'sp' JUDGE