Civil Revision No.5193/2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.5193/2011 Date of Decision:29.8.2011 Balbir Singh ...................Petitioner vs Tilak Raj and another ...................Respondents. Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present:- Mr.NS Rapri,Advocate for the defendant/petitioner. Jaswant Singh,J.(Oral) Defendant/petitioner has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order date 12.8.2011 (P2) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Mukerian, whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC moved by the respondents/ plaintiffs was allowed and besides rectifying some clerical mistakes they were allowed to mention the description of the suit property as per attached site plan with the amended plaint and examine a Draftsman to prove the same. Briefly noticed, plaintiff/respondent-Tilak Raj filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell Civil Revision No.5193/2011 2 dated 2.12.2002 in respect of land measuring 1K04M being 1/3rd share of land measuring 3K-12 M bearing khasra no.2/14/2/1 situated in revenue Estate of Village Kalu Chang, Tehsil Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur and one house shown in red colour in the site plan. The target date of registration was fixed as 31.5.2003. The said agreement having fizzled out, plaintiffs/respondents filed the aforesaid suit on 31.7.2003. The case is stated to at rebuttal stage when the impugned order dated 12.8.2011 (P2) came to be passed permitting the respondents/plaintiffs to (i) rectify the clerical mistakes in the plaint i.e. replacing the word defendant instead of plaintiff and vice versa; and (ii) to insert the description of the suit property in the head note/prayer clause of the plaint, as per site plan attached with the amendment application. At the time of hearing of the case, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for permission to withdraw the revision petition with the indulgence that the trial court be directed to dispose of the suit within a specific time frame. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find that the prayer made is just and reasonable and is liable to be accepted. The suit was filed on 1.7.2003. Already a period of eight years has elapsed and as a consequence of the amendment that has been allowed by the trial court, it would take some more time, as respondents/defendants want to examine a Draftsman who prepared the site plan mentioning the description of the suit property. Civil Revision No.5193/2011 3 Accordingly, the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant is allowed. The revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a direction to the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously, and preferably within nine months from today, by giving limited opportunities to both sides for leading remaining evidence. 29.8.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge