Dilbagh Singh v. Karnail Singh And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 19.11.2025 DILBAGH SINGH .... Petitioner

VERSUS

KARNAIL SINGH AND ORS .... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Mr. Ketan Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Davinder Singh Saini, Advocate for the respondents. ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL) 1.

Challenge in the present revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 25.07.2024 (Annexure P-10) passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana whereby the application filed by the petitioner herein under Order VI Rule 17 CPC was dismissed.

2.

On 11.09.2024 the following order was passed : 'Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that on 08.06.2022 stay was granted and the defendantrespondents were restrained from transferring the suit property. However, despite being aware of the stay, the property was transferred by the defendant-respondents on 27.07.2022. The petitioner got knowledge of the same in 2023 when a suit was filed against the petitioner.

-2Subsequently, the application for amendment was filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that he would restrict his prayer for amendment only to the subsequent events and would not press the other amendments which have been prayed in the application.

Notice of motion returnable 01.10.2024.

Dasti as well. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to serve the respondents through the counsel representing them before the Court concerned.

To be shown in the urgent list.'

3.

Learned counsel for the respondents states that the respondents would have no objection if the amendments sought are confined to the subsequent events only. Learned counsel would further contend that in case the petitioner is to lead any further evidence in regard to the amendments, the respondents be given an opportunity to cross-examine and also to lead their evidence with regard to the amendments.

4.

In view of the above, the present revision petition is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 25.07.2024 is set aside and the amendment application is allowed to the extent that the same shall be restricted only to the subsequent events. It is made clear that in case the petitioner leads any further evidence in regard to the amendments, the respondents shall be given time to cross-examine and also to lead their

-3evidence in respect to the amendments. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

19.11.2025 (ALKA SARIN) Aman Jain JUDGE NOTE:

Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: Yes/No