2025:HHC:25314 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 527 of 2019 Decided on: 30.07.2025 Shri Harbans Kumar … Petitioner Versus Rajput Kalyan Sabha, HP and others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ___________________________________________________________________ For the petitioner : Mr. B.L. Soni, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ashwani K. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ishan Sharma, Advocate for respondents No. 1 and 2. : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate for respondents No. 4(i) to 4(iv). : Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 6. Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) By way of this petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for the following relief:- “[1] Set aside the order dated06.09.2019.” 2. The petitioner has assailed order dated 06.09.2019, passed by the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Palampur, in terms whereof, an application filed by the petitioner/defendant No. 3 before learned Court below under Order 14, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for framing of additional Issue, has been dismissed. 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:25314 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused the impugned order, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned. It is a matter of record that to the original plaint, no formal written statement was preferred by the petitioner/defendant No. 3 and he adopted the written statement filed thereto by defendants No. 1 and 2. It is also a matter of record that application under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed before the learned Court below by the plaintiff to amend the plaint was only qua the valuation of the civil suit and nothing else. However, the proposed Issue/additional Issue proposed to be framed is not relatable to the amendment allowed by the learned Court below and is relatable to the main issue that was raised in the plaint, qua which, Issues earlier stood framed and at the stage of framing of the Issues, no request was made by the petitioner for framing of the Issue, which he wants to be framed now. Therefore, in light of the observations made hereinabove, as this Court does not find any perversity in the order impugned and further as this Court sees no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Trial Court, present petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 30, 2025 (narender)