Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23 Court No. - 18 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6215 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ram Krishna And 3 Others Respondent :- Addl. Dist. Judge / F.T.C.-Naveen Gonda And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Pradeep Kumar Shukla,Indrajeet Shukla Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. Petitioners-defendants have preferred this petition under Article 227 Constitution of India to challenge the order dated 2nd September, 2024 passed by Additional District Judge/F.T.C., Gonda, whereby the order dated 24th November, 2022 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 12, Gonda allowing the amendment application by plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure has been upheld. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that a suit for permanent injunction filed by the plaintiffs is pending since 1994, wherein the application seeking amendment of the plaint was moved by plaintiffs on 23rd August, 2022, and the same has been allowed by the Civil Court without examining the facts and circumstances of the case. Learned counsel submits that the application was highly belated, therefore, the same could not have been entertained and the error of law committed by the Civil Court has not been rectified by the Revisional Court, as the revision against the said order has been dismissed vide order dated 2.9.2024. Learned counsel submits that the impugned orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law, therefore, the interference is warranted by this Court in exercise of superintendence powers under Article 227 Constitution of India. After hearing the learned counsel, considering his submissions and examining the paper book, this Court finds that the plaintiffs brought a suit for permanent injunction in November, 1994, wherein the defendants also filed their counterclaim on 26th April, 1999, as both the parties had claimed possession over the suit property while seeking injunction against each other. A perusal of the application moved under Order VI Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure shows that the plaintiffs have specifically pleaded that during the pendency of the suit, the defendants have set up the tin shed to take possession, and as a consequence, they prayed for amendment of the plaint. The Civil Court upon examining the contents of the application and pleadings of the parties proceeded to accept the application with the observation that the subsequent event of dispossessing the plaintiffs would not alter the nature of the suit, much less result in any prejudice to the defendants. Similarly, the Revisional Court has also carefully examined the material on record while upholding the order with the observation that, if, such an application is not allowed, it would multiply the litigation between the parties. A perusal of the impugned order passed by Additional District Judge/F.T.C., Gonda clearly shows that the Revisional Court has carefully examined the material on record while holding that the order accepting the application for amendment of plaint does not suffer from any illegality or impropriety. The orders are based upon correct appreciation of facts and law on the subject, therefore, no interference is warranted by this Court in exercise of superintendence powers. The petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 2.1.2025 Brijesh Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench