•ar :;^fc COURTOF CHHATTiSGARH; -It^etition (C) Jijo. 233J Petitioners "u 1) Nand Lat Sahu ageds about 67 years, S/o. Shri Mohan Sai Sahu. 2) Motila! Sahu aged about 45 years, S/o. Nandia! Sahii. 3) Anjoo Kumar Sahu aged about 34 years, S'o. Nandlai Sahu. 4) Arjun Lai Sahu aged about 5S years, S/o. Nandlal Sahu. 5) Smt. Shakun aged about 44 years, Wd/o Late Bheekhsm Sahu. 6) Ku. Sunita Sahuafled about 17 years, Minor D/o. Late Shri Sheekham Sahu, through Mother Smt. Sha-kun Sahu, widow of Late Bheekham Sahu. 7) Pswan Kumar Sahu aaed about 15 years, S./o. Late Bheekham Sahu, Minor, throuah iviother Smt. Shakun Sahu, widow of Late Bheekham sariii. i) Ku. Pooja Sahu aged about13 years, D/o. Late Bheekham Sahu, IVSinor through: Mother •Smt. Shaku" Sahu widow .of Late Bheskham Sahu. 9) Keshaw Sahu aged about 11 years, S/o. Late Bheekham Sahu, Minor through: Mother Smt. Shakun Sahu widow of Lsie Bheekham Sahu. Aii residents of Purani Basti Korba, Tahsii and District Korba, CG. r^egliiliH Manl Lal Sahu aaed about 39 years, S/o. Shri Nandkial Sahu Wo. "urani Basti Korba, Tahsii -t^ andDist.Korba.CG. 2) State of Chhattlsgarh through the Coliector, Korba. (Writ Petition under Articies 226/227 of the Constitution of india) >B: Hoh'bie Shri Justice Satish K. Agnlhotri 'resent: Shri Arun Kumar Agrawai, counsel for the petnioners. Ku. Dioaii Pandev, Panel Lawver for resoondent No.2/State. (Passed on 3Cth Apnl 2007) By this petition, the petitioners impugn the orcier datea 22-3-2007 (Annexure P/1) passed by Civii Judge, Ciass I, Korba, Dist. Kor'oa, in oendina Civil SuiS No. 12-A/200S. aiiowins tne apDlication filed under iule 17 of the Code of Civlt Procedure (for short. "the Code ssekina amendmsnt in ss> 'lfflU 31. 2) Learneci Civil Judge aiiowed the appiication for amendment on the ground that the suit was fiied for partition, dscjaration and permanent injunction. The plaintiff/respondent No.1 wanted to delefe the word "partition" to avoid payment of stamp court fee. When the plaintiff/respond.snt No.1 was directed to make good of shortage of stamp court fse, he fiied an aDDlication t'or amendment bv cteleting the word "oartltion" and converting the same to the suit for declaration and oermanent iniunction. 3) The Court beiow heid that the reiief for deciaration and permanent injunction can be soughtfor independsntSy and "rt is not nesessary for the pSaintiff/'resDondent No.1 to seek a reiisf o* oartit'.on. it is for the plaintiff/respondsnt No.1 to amend the suit for appropriate reiief accordingiy. Thus, this prayer was aliowed. -?>- Raju 4) Being aggrieved, the petitioners/defendants have fiied this petition questloning the iegality and vaiidity of the order permiffing amendment in the plaint. 5'i St is weil settied that merits of the averments sought to be incorporated by way of amendment not to be adjudged at the stage of admission. The amendment in the pleadings should be granted iiberally. !n view of that, 1 do not find any illegaiity or irreguiarity or procedurai error in the impugned/judgment order passed by the Court beiow. 6. it is welt settied principle of iaw that under Article 227 of the Constitution of india, this Court has iurisdiction of judiciai review of the order passed 'ov the Court beiow, in the event. tnere is manifest and apparent error on the face of the proceedings based on the ctear ignorance or utter disregard to the provislons of law or there is grave faiiure of iustice or orave iniustice has occasioned thereby. Further, this Court can also entsrtain the petition if there is peroersity, irregu'iarity or illeaalitv in the orocess of decision, not in the decision itseif. 7. ADDivina the above settted princlDies of iaw to the facts of the oresent ca.se, it does not warranf an inte'rferencs with the decision oassed bv the court below. Thus. this petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge