IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.394 of 2010 Date of decision: 2.11.2010 Liaq Ram & ors. …. Petitioners Versus Roop Ram & ors. ….. Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting? No For the petitioners: Mr.Dinesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: None. _____________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J.(Oral) 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 19.3.2010 whereby the learned Trial Court permitted the plaintiffs to amend the plaint. 2. The undisputed facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed a suit praying for a decree for permanent Prohibitory Injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the suit land. It is not disputed that the learned Trial Court passed an interim order whereby the parties were directed to maintain status quo. The case of the plaintiffs is that despite 2 such order of status quo, the defendants raised a three storied building on the spot. At the stage of allowing the amendment, the Court is not supposed to go into the merits of the case. The question as to whether this building was raised after the stay order was passed or before the suit was instituted is a matter which the learned Trial Court has to decide on merits. However, the plaintiffs cannot be denied the right to amend the suit on the allegations made by them. If these allegations are found to be correct then they may be entitled to the relief claimed. I find no error in the impugned order. Therefore, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. November 2, 2010 ( Deepak Gupta ) (m) Judge