W.P. No.15038.11 Writ Petition No. 15038 of 2011 15/11/2011 Shri Pranay Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Ashok Lalwani, learned counsel for the respondents. Heard. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 10-08-2011 passed by IV th Additional Civil Judge to the Court of First Civil Judge Class-II, Bhopal, in R.C.S. No. 936- A/2008. By the impugned order an application under Order 14 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, filed by the petitioners/defendants for framing additional issues has been rejected. The suit is for eviction brought by respondents/plaintiffs. On the basis of rival pleadings the trial Court framed six following issues :- “1- v- D;k oknh dks oknxzLr LFkku edku ua- 36, y[ksjkiqjk Hkksiky ds Hkwry ij fLFkr nqdku dh vius o;Ld iq=ksa ds fy;s fuoklsRrj iz;kstu ds fy;s okLrfod vko';drk gSA c- D;k oknxzLr LFkku ds vfrfjDr Hkksiky 'kgj esa oknh ds LokfeRo dk ;qfDr-;qDr #i ls W.P. No.15038.11 dksbZ vU; mi;qDr fuoklsRrj LFkku ugha gSA 2- D;k oknh us lwpuk i= fnukafdr 28-07-08 izfroknhx.k dks izsf"kr dj oknxzLr LFkku dh fdjk;snkjh fnukad 05-09-08 dks lekIr dj fjDr vkf/kiR; pkgk FkkA 3- D;k izfroknhx.k Onkjk ekg tqykbZ] vxLr 2008 ds fdjk;k 800/- #i;s oknh dks vnk ugha fd;k gSA 4- D;k izfroknh dz- 1] oknh dks fcuk lwpuk fn;s oknxzLr LFkku dh fdjk;snkjh ls i`Fkd gks x;k gSA 5- D;k izfroknh dz- 2 us fcuk oknh dh vuqefr ds oknxzLr LFkku izeksn lkMh lsaVj dks miHkkMs ij fn;k gSA 6- lgk;rk ,oa okn O;;A” The petitioners not satisfied with the same filed an application seeking framing of following additional issues :- “ (1) D;k izfroknhx.k oknh dz- 2 ds fdjk;snkj gSa ? (2) D;k oknh dz- 2 o izfroknhx.k ds e/; fdjk;snkj o Hkou Lokeh ds laca/k gSa ? (3) D;k oknh d- 2 oknh dz- 1 dh igyh ifRu dh larku gS] ;fn gka rks izHkko ? (4) D;k oknh dz- 2 vius lkSrsys HkkbZ jkts'k dqekj dh vko';drk ds fy, LFkku [kkyh djok ldrk gS ?” The trial Court observing that the issues already framed would cover the case of respective parties rejected the application for framing of additional issues. The petitioners are aggrieved by the said W.P. No.15038.11 order. It is urged that the trial Court has been too technical in rejecting the application and by non- framing of additional issues there is likelihood that the petitioners will not be able to put forth their defence effectively. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/plaintiffs submits that the issues already being framed on the basis of rival pleadings since cover the entire case put forth by respondents/plaintiffs and the defence of petitioners/defendants, the order passed by the trial Court in rejecting the application for framing additional issues cannot be faulted with. Considered the rival submissions. Rule 5 of Order 14 of the CPC gives the discretionary power to the Court that it may at any time before passing of a decree amend the issues or frame additional issues on such terms as it thinks fit, and all such amendments or additional issues as may be necessary for determining the matters in controversy between the parties shall be so made or framed. Evident it is from the issues which are already framed that, they are in consonance with the W.P. No.15038.11 stipulation contained in Rule 3 of Order 14. Even otherwise a refusal by the Court in framing the additional issues does not determine the rights nor the obligations with the parties relating to any matter or controversy who are always at liberty to put forth the case as per the pleading. In view whereof since there is no jurisdictional error committed by the trial Court in rejecting the application for framing additional issues, no interference is warranted. In the result petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs. (SANJAY YADAV) JUDGE SC