CMPMO 299 of 2008. 11.12.2008 Present: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for the petitioners. Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, counsel for the respondent. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kasauli in Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 51/6 of 2008/2007 allowing the prayer of the plaintiff – respondent for amendment of the plaint. The plaintiff moved the learned trial Court under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer that para 7 may be allowed to be amended by addition of the following facts/ prayer: “ The will is wrong and illegal as the suit land is ancestral one and as such no will qua the same could be executed by late Shri Lachhami Singh. Moreover, there is a custom in the area and caste of the plaintiff which is still prevailing that ancestral land cannot be bequeathed, as such, the will in question is wrong and illegal.” The application was resisted by the petitioners- defendants. The learned trial Court, after -2- hearing both the parties, held that the foundation for challenge of the will dated 20.9.1994 had already been laid in the plaint and that the amendment only seeks to challenge the will on another ground. The amendment was allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the plaintiff-respondent is claiming amendments in driblets. Earlier also a prayer for amendment had been made on 20.11.2006 which prayer was allowed. He submits that the plaintiff is deliberately manipulating the process of law. Undoubtedly, a party cannot be allowed to claim amendments in driblets unless of course the amendments claimed relate to events which are subsequent to and did not exist on the date when the prayer for amendment was made. However, without entering into the legal niceties of the matter, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the plaintiff-respondent shall pay Rs.3300/- as costs to the petitioner herein. This shall be in addition to the costs already imposed by the learned trial Court. Parties to appear before the learned trial Court on 29.12.2008. A direction is issued that such costs shall be -3- paid on the date of appearance before the learned trial Court, that is, on 29.12.2008. A direction is also issued that in case the costs are not paid, the application shall be deemed to have been dismissed. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of and interim orders vacated. December 11, 2008 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.