Petitioiiers Defendants No.4 &3 COURT OF CHHATTJSGARH AT Writ Pstition (Art.227) No.2§§2of 2011 1. Resporsdersts Pialntiffs Ravindra Pai Ssngh, S/'o Shri Ram Prasad Singh, aged about 58 years; R/o M-32, Rajeev Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Sachin Shandiiya, S/o Shrl Upendra Shandli'ya, aged about 42 years, R/o A-25, Rajeev Nagar, Rajpur, District- Ralpur (C.G.) Varsus 1. Smt.Sumsn Dheer, W/o Shri B.K.Dheer, aged about 52 years, R/o MiG-19, indrawati Colony, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Smt.Rajkumsri Kanda, W/o. Shri Madan La! Kanda, aged about 60 years; C/'o Smt.Suman Dheer, R/o C/o Smt.Suman Dheer, EvljG-19, Indrawati Colony, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Gyan Ganga Educational Academy, viSSage-Nardaha, BaSoda Bazar Road, Tehsii & District-Raipur (C.G.) 4. Laxmi Narayan Shandilya, S/o Shri H.P. Shandiya, aged about 55 years; ~R/o A-2, Rajeev Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 5. Gyan Ganga Educational Snstitute Privats Lffnlted, yiISage-Narhada, Baioda Bazar Road, Tehsij & District-Raipur (C.G.) (Writ Petltion under Articie 227 of t'ne Constitution of indla) Mr.Ashish Surana, counseS forthe petitloners. Mr.Roop Naik, counsei for respondents No.1 and 2. None present for respondents No.3 to 5. te^ ^ ^- (SB: Hon'bie Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) ORDER (13-9-2011) 1. 3y this writ petition under Articie 227 of the Constitution of india the petstloners have chalienged the Segailty & propriety of the 28.2.2011 passed by the 10th Additionai District Judge, Ralpur, sn Civil Suit No.1-A/09, whereby the Court beiow has aiiowed applicatton flted by respondents No.1 and 2 under Order 6 Ruie 17 of the Code of Clvij Procedure for amendment in the piaint. 2. I have heard iearned counset for the parties and perused the order impugned. 3. Suit was filed by respondents No.1 and 2 in the year 1998, In whteh they have filed amendment appiicatlon in the year 2010. Such application is not barred under provlso to Rule 17 of Order 6 of the Code of Civli Procedure. Application for amendment reveais that respondents No.1 and 2 have amended the pleading relating to cause of actlon arose In the year 1996 and 1998, which may be time barred. 4. IR these circumstances, the wrlt petition is disposed of with the observation that aliowing the amendment shali not be construed the amended pleadlng an<Tdalm is within llmitation. Both the parties may file appropriate appiication on the ground of ilmltatlon before the Court below relating to such pieading. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.p. Sbarina Judge r^