Civil Revision No. 7407 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7407 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 8.1.2010 Krishan Lal Bareja .. Petitioner v. Narain Dass and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. R.S. Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 9.11.2009, passed by the learned court below, whereby the application filed by the petitioner- plaintiff for amendment of the plaint, was dismissed. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of partition of double storeyed house No. 802, Ward No. 3, near Prem Mandir, Insar Mohalla to the extent of 1/4th share as inherited by him. After the filing of the written statement, issues had already been framed and the case was listed for evidence when the application in question was filed seeking to add para 3-A in the plaint, giving history regarding some commercial plot purchased by the father of the petitioner-plaintiff and also certain other developments, which all took place before the filing of the suit. The learned court below finding the application to be misconceived dismissed the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner in the present case wants to add certain pleadings in the plaint, which are necessary for proper adjudication of the case and the case being at the initial stage, no prejudice is going to be caused to the respondents-defendants. However, the fact is not disputed that all the facts, which are sought to be pleaded, were within the knowledge of the petitioner-plaintiff at the time of filing of the suit. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the present petition. The claim made in the suit is for possession by way of partition of a residential house in which the petitioner-plaintiff is claiming 1/4th share on account of inheritance. The claim is to be proved by the petitioner- Civil Revision No. 7407 of 2009 [2] plaintiff by way of leading cogent evidence showing inter-alia that the property was owned by his father and the petitioner-plaintiff, being his one of the legal heirs, has right to claim inheritance. The pleadings, which are sought to be incorporated, are not very material for the purpose. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 8.1.2010 mk