Research › Browse › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

1989 DIGILAW 256 (RAJ)

Bhonri Devi v. Kailash Chand

1989-04-12

J.S.VERMA

body1989
JUDGMENT 1. 1. This application by the plaintiffs is for extension of time to permit the plaintiff, to incorporate the amendment which was allowed in the plaint Admittedly, amended plaint was filed in the trial court after expiry of the period allowed for this purpose on November 1.8.1987. This being so, the amendment cannot be incorporated in the plaint unless time is extended for doing so till the date of filing of the amended plaint in the trial court. When this matter came up for hearing on March 10, 1989, counsel for the petitioners stated that the application made in the trial court for extension of time was pending. Accordingly this matter was adjourned. Learned counsel states that the trial court has not yet decided that application. 2. In order to avoid any further delay in the trial of suit, the time for incorporating the amendment in the plaint is extended hereby upto the date on which the amended plaint was filed in the trial court. In view of this direction the trial court shill now proceed with the trial of the suit treating the plaint as amended in accordance with the amended plaint which has already been filed by the plaintiff in the trial court. The application is allowed in this manner. No costs.Application allowed. *******