The High Court · 2012

Mr. Harkesh Manuja, Advocate. Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate M.M.S. BEDI,J. Vide impugned order dated 28.1.2010, an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the plaint has been allowed by the trial court, holding that by way of proposed amendment, the plaintiff wants to add new facts by deleting some facts, already pleaded and that the burden to prove the case is on the plaintiff. The trial court has observed that the amendment, if allowed, will not cause any prejudice to the defendants and the defendants can be compensated by cost and a sum of Rs.2000/- was awarded as cost. Learned counsel for the defendant- petitioners has submitted that in the present case, issues were framed on 28.1.2008 and that instead of leading evidence, the plaintiff- respondents had come forward to seek amendment of the plaint and that the amendment could not have been allowed after the commencement of the trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that as per the original pleadings, the plaintiff had admitted the signatures on the gift deed dated 7.3.2010, executed by the plaintiff and defendant CR 1372 of 2010 2 No.4 in favour of defendant No.1, who had allegedly sold the gifted property to defendant No.2 but in the amended plaint the plaintiff has sought to incorporate the plea that the signatures of the plaintiff on the gift deed are forged. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, carefully going through the plaint, the application for amendment and the impugned order, this court is of the considered opinion that the validity of the gift deed dated 7.3.2002 by the plaintiff and defendant No.4 in favour of defendant No.1 has to be considered. It does not appear to be a case where the plaintiff has withdrawn any admission to the prejudice of the defendant- petitioners. Since the amendment has been sought at initial stage and a plea has been incorporated, which requires to be adjudicated finally between the parties, no ground is made out for interference in the order passed by the trial court. Dismissed. March 15 ,2012 TSM ( M.M.S. BEDI ) JUDGE