The court permits the petitioner to amend the land claim and rules that cases should not be considered on technical grounds: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The court permits the petitioner to amend the land claim and rules that cases should not be considered on technical grounds, is upheld by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh through the learned Judge JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSHAN BAROWALIA,in the case of Amar Singh (Deceased) Son Of Tarlok Chand Son Of Hukam Singh V.  No.1 Against The Impugned Order, (CIVIL REVISION NO.39 OF 2019).


Brief facts of the case:

The circumstances of the case are that the plaintiffs/respondents maintained an action for possession against the petitioner-defendant No 1/ (Bihari Lal) (Bihari Lal). When the matter was listed for final arguments, it was noticed that there were clerical and typographical mistakes in para 5 of the written statement claiming adverse possession, even otherwise also, defendant No 1 never intended to claim adverse possession, as even in para 1 of the written statement, defendant No 1 clearly stated that Bansi Lal, son of Mohan, was in possession of the suit land and he became owner by way of adverse possession.

The Defendant No 1 cannot claim adverse possession and statements, as have arrived in para-5, with relation to claiming adverse possession by him, asked to be modified. Similarly in para 5, in fourth line of the written declaration, words “the defendants” were asked to be substituted with words “Shri Khushia”.

Senior Counsel Ajay Sharma appeared on behalf of the petitioner. He contended that words “the defendants” in para 5 of the written statement in fourth line has happened owing to the typographical mistake and the same was necessary to be changed, as being eliminated.

He said the case of the petitioner-defendant No.1 is that a person, namely Bansi Lal, was in adverse possession of the suit land, since 1957 and after he perfected his title, land was partitioned between the co-sharer and one of his successor Shri Khushia, inducted defendant, as a tenant on the suit land and inadvertently due to the typographical mistake words “the defendants”, as mentioned, in para-5 of the written statement in fourth line of the written statement is required to be amended.

The Counsel noted that the trial court has given the order without application of mind and the same is necessary to be set aside to fulfil the goals of justice. The Court decided that the alteration as called for was necessary to be permitted for the simple reason that it was in the interest of justice and was merely for rectification of typographical mistake.



 The Himachal Pradesh High Court has granted a petitioner’s request for a modification to a land title action, noting that the ultimate purpose of dispensing justice is to ensure that parties receive justice and that cases should not be handled on technical grounds. The Civil Revision Petition filed by the petitioner appealing the trial court’s February 6, 2019 ruling dismissing a motion for correction of the written statement under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.


Click here to view you judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat