Parshotam Dass vs Durga Dass And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 14856 P&H

                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115766




                                               2023:PHHC:115766
125-1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                   AT CHANDIGARH

                    1.CR-7696-2014 (O&M)

Parshotam Dass
                                                ..Petitioner
             Versus

Durga Dass and others
                                               .Respondents

2.CR-724-2015 (O&M)

Durga Dass ..Petitioner Versus

Parshotam Dass and others .Respondents

Date of decision: 01.09.2023

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:- Mr. Ajaivir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner in CR-7696-2014 and for respondent no.1 in CR-724-2015

Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for respondent No.1 in CR-7696-2014 and for the petitioner in CR-724-2015

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

1. By this order, two connected revision petitions i.e CR-7696-

2014 and CR-724-2015 shall stand disposed of.

2. In CR-7696-2014, the petitioner herein is the defendant in

a pending suit filed by the plaintiff for grant of decree of declaration that

he is owner in possession of the suit property and the judgment and

decree dated 15.09.1992 is illegal, null and void. The suit was filed in

the year 1998. During the pendency of the suit, an application for

permission to amend the plaint was allowed on 16.05.2014. Defendant

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115766

CR-7696-2014 (O&M) and other connected case 2 2023:PHHC:115766

no.1, while filing the reply to the amended plaint, incorporated certain

preliminary objections, without seeking prior permission of the court in

this regard. The trial court has observed that only the portion of the reply

that answers the amended plaint shall be taken into consideration.

3. Upon realizing the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in Gurdial Singh and others vs. Raj Kumar Aneja and others

2002 AIR (SC) 1003, the learned counsel representing the petitioner

prays for permission to withdraw the revision petition in order to file an

application for permission to amend the written statement before the trial

court. He submits that the court of first instance should be requested to

decide the same within a period of one month.

4. Learned counsel representing the respondent has no

objection thereto.

5. In view of the aforesaid facts, the revision petition is

disposed of with a request to the trial court to decide the application

which may be filed by defendant no.1 for permission to amend the

written statement within one month of its filing.

6. In CR-724-2015 the petitioner is a plaintiff. His

application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Order VI Rule 17 of the

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been dismissed by the trial court.

Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that in view of the

order passed in CR-7696-2014, no further order in this revision petition

is required to be passed.

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115766

CR-7696-2014 (O&M) and other connected case 3 2023:PHHC:115766

7. Both the revision petitions are disposed of in the

aforementioned terms.

8. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

01.09.2023                                       (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                                 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :        Yes/No
Whether reportable :               Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:115766

3 of 3