Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 60903 of 2009 Petitioner :- Rajendra Prasad Nayak Respondent :- Addl. District Judge Court No. 1 & Anr. Petitioner Counsel :- Raj Kumar Ojha Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the amendment
application as well as the relief claimed in the suit.
The relief claimed in the suit was that a permanent injunction be issued
against the respondents restraining them from raising any construction
unless and until the property is divided half and half. In order to give
effect to the said relief claimed, an amendment application has been
filed alleging that since the defendant refused to divide the partitioned
share and raise the constructions therefore the application was allowed.
I do not see any change in the nature of the relief claimed nor does it
change the nature of the suit at all. The courts below have taken a
correct view in allowing the amendment application.
The writ petition is misconceived and is rejected.
Order Date :- 22.1.2010
mna