Petitioners Resnondenm /‘\ a?) ‘1 1N THE HIGH COURTbF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH A? EELRNQ. @38 12095 §§mgig é§§m®€i BILASPUR (I. Dhanwant R210 Thit€ S/o Sadashiv Thite, ged about 65 ysars, ice Pmsident aratha Mitra Mandal R/ o Budhapara, Raipur—(C.G‘} Marath Mitra Mandal BudhapatraJlaipur Through its Se aieiakgg Budhapara, Raipur, Dist : Raipur—(C.G.) Versus 1. Baasaheb Dani l S/o Ganpat Rao Dani Aged about 60 wars, R/o Budhapara Raipur~(C.G.) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Vidya Mandir Late Baburao Dani, Smriti Shikshan Samiti Through its President, Budhapara, Rajpur—(C. G.) Adhyaksha Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Vidya Mandir Budhapara, Rajpur—(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA \{V ” A V M I 00 15.3.25 Shri Rakesh Anthony, ct Shri P.S. Koshy, Deputy The petitioners, who are havg preferred this Writ petitic of India being aggricvcd by ‘ passcd by kamed 7th Civil No.245A/ 1995 whereby 1 application med by the amendment in the plaint, Brief facts leading to respondent No. 1 hemin d1ed and two others for declara defendant No.2 to 4 ale institution in the building ‘ doing any such act. Respon ground that building in ques Rao Dani and thereafter, be' the owner and manager of f application respondent No. showing that since his father of the property on accoun 28.11.1991 and after his d1 property. As such, by way oi No. fwanted to elaborate his rurisel for the petitioners. Advocate Geneml for the State. the defendants befoxe the court below, tn under Article 227 of the Constitution mier dated 8.12.1998 (Annexure P—1) Judge Class-II, Raipur in Civil Suit ed Civil Judge has allowed the aintin'lrespondent No.1 herein for tiling of this writ pen'u’on are that civil suitagainst the petitioners herein 'on and injunction to the edect that t entitled to open any educational question and they be restrained non: ent No.1 herein filed the suit on the on belongs to his father Late Shri Babu g the son of said Babu Rao Dani he is hat proPerty. By the said amendment 1 wanted to insert the amendment Late Babu Rao Dani became the owner t of Will executed in his favour on :ath he has become the OWner of the the amendment application respondent contention which was already taken by him in Paragraph No.3 of the plaint. e o ' l XI—HC—22 As has been men oncd by leamed Civil Judge that the amendment in question is not ased on any separate cause of action, does not chaa’ge the Datum of suit and moreover, the application has been nled delayed, theref amendment can be allowed by compensating the petitioners herein and accoxdingly, imposed the cost of Rs.400/ -. Having heald learned unsel for the petitioners and having perused the, impugned orde p1aint and written statement, I am of the opinion that learned coun el for the petitioners has not been able to make out a case for in rference by this Court by exercising extraordinary jurisdiction un er Article 227 of the Constitution of India, as there is no illegality r infirmity in the impugned order. As mentioned by the trial co in the impugned order that by the proposed amendment respon ent No. 1 herein wants to elaborate the pleadings which is already on the record and learned counsel for the petitioners during the cours of arguments said that so far the plaintih’s evidence has com need. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the writ petition of the p ‘tioners is devoid of any merit, same is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed at the admission stage itself. Consequently, M.(W.)P. No. 703/2005 65 LA. No.1722/05 also stand dismissed. l Sd/- L.-C. Bhadoo Judge (din hair) o , r, u