Shyam Lal & Ors vs Smt. Champa Bai & Ors on 3 December, 2009

CW 2294/08-Shri Shyam Lal & Ors. Vs. Smt. Champa Bai & Ors.   Judgment dt.03.12.2009

                                          1/3


              S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2294/2008
           Shri Shyam Lal & Ors. Vs. Smt. Champa Bai & Ors.

Date of judgment :                                             03rd Dec., 2009

                                     PRESENT

              HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI

Mr. H.R. Soni for the petitioner.
Mr. Sunil Bhandari for Mr. M.R. Singhvi for the respondents.

                                        -------

1.             Heard learned counsel.



2.             This writ petition appears to have been filed aggrieved of

the order dated 10.7.2007 whereby the learned trial court rejected the

application of the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. for

amendment in the suit for partition.



3.             The learned trial court has, in detail, narrated that the

earlier suit for partition itself was decreed on 31.1.1950, about 60

years back from now and after final decree, the sale of portion which

fell in the share of present respondent, LRs of Jasraj and was sold and

to implead the purchasers of said sold portion, the present petitioners

filed the application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. which was rejected
 CW 2294/08-Shri Shyam Lal & Ors. Vs. Smt. Champa Bai & Ors.   Judgment dt.03.12.2009

                                          2/3


by the learned trial court referring to the entire history of the case.



4.             The learned trial court has also observed that earlier also

such amendment application dated 14.7.1992 was rejected by the

learned trial court on 20.8.1992 against which a revision petition

namely S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.540/1992 was filed in this

Court and that was also dismissed as withdrawn.                        However, the

petitioners again filed amendment application under Order 6 Rule 17

C.P.C. which has been rejected by the learned trial court by the

impugned order dated 10.7.2007.



5.             Having heard learned counsel for the respondents and in

the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion

that the impugned order of the learned trial court dated 10.7.2007

cannot be said to be suffering from any error of law. The petitioner-

plaintiffs appear to be in habit of dragging the litigation over decades

and a fresh suit was filed seeking partition of the property of which

final decree has been passed way back in the year 1950 and upheld

upto the stage of second appeal by this Court and such fresh suit was

filed on 11.6.1992 in which the amendment was sought in the year
 CW 2294/08-Shri Shyam Lal & Ors. Vs. Smt. Champa Bai & Ors.   Judgment dt.03.12.2009

                                          3/3


1995 by moving the present application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C.

which took 12 years to be rejected by the learned trial court. Against

the impugned order dated 10.7.2007, this writ petition filed in the

year 2008 and which has now come up for hearing before this Court

today. This length of litigation for a small issue like amendment

application shows the misery of the litigants by the length of process

itself. Such orders under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. are challenged

under Article 227 of the Constitution of India just for the sake of it

without any valid reason.



6.             In the considered opinion of this Court, the present writ

petition is thoroughly misconceived and deserves to be dismissed.

Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Cost is however made easy.



                                                 [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J.

iten No.27
babulal