R.K.Gupta and Another vs First Addl. District Judge,Rampur and Another

O. P. Garg, J.—Heard Sri Rahul Sripat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B. D. Mandhyan, appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 8.10.1998 whereby the 1st Addl. District Judge, Rampur has rejected amendment application riled by the petitioner in Civil Appeal No. 177 of 1975.

The petitioner filed Suit No. 370 of 1956 for enforcement of right of preemption. The said suit was decreed on 29.4.1957. First appeal filed by the defendantrespondent No. 2 was dismissed. He preferred Second Appeal which was allowed by this Court and the decree passed by the trial Court and as affirmed by the First Appellate Court was set aside. After passing of the decree Sri B. R. Kishore, the original plaintiff, of which the petitioner are legal heirs obtained possession of the disputed shop on 3.3.1958. After the decree was set aside, the Respondent No. 2 filed an application for restitution or possession and damages under Section 144, C. P. C. This application was registered as Misc. Case No. 415 of 1972. Against the order passed under Section 144,C. P.C the moved with regard to certain facts which, it is alleged came to the knowledge of the petitioners after considerable long time. This amendment application has been rejected by the appellate Court on 8.10.1998. It is this order which has been challenged in this writ petition. The appellate Court has observed that the amendment application has been filed with a view to delay the disposal of the appeal and to linger on restitution of possession to the Respondent No. 2.

After having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the appellate Court has rightly rejected the amendment application. The impugned order dated 8.10.1998 is not in violation of any fundamental principle of law. In view of Full Bench decision of this Court in Ganga Saran v. Civil Judge, Hapur, 1999(17) ALR 380, interim order passed by the civil Court cannot be lightly interfered with in the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The writ'' petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.