[2025:RJ-JP:40078] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8185/2015 1. Ramdeen Sharma son of Late Shri Panna Lal Sharma since deceased through his legal representatives:- 1/1. Bhudevi wife of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma, (since deceased) 1/2. Vishambhar Dayal Sharma son of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma, 1/3. Rakesh Kumar son of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma, 1/4. Basant Lal son of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma, 1/5. Shiv Kumar son of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma, 1/6. Ganesh Kumar son of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma, All resident of Ward No.6, Town Rajakhera, Tehsil Rajakhera, Dholpur (Rajasthan) 1/7. Shavitri Devi daughter of Late Shri Ramdeen Sharma wife of Shri Umesh Kumar Sharma, resident of Basaie Kalan, Police Station, Iradat Nagar, Tehsil Kheragarh, District Agra (U.P.) ----Plaintiff-petitioners Versus 1. Vijendra Singh son of Late Shri Ramchandra, 2. Virendra Singh son of Late Shri Ramchandra, Both resident of Ward No.6, Town Rajakhera, Tehsil Rajakhera, Dholpur (Rajasthan) ----Defendant-non-petitioners For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.K. Garg For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA Order 24/09/2025 [2025:RJ-JP:40078] (2 of 3) [CW-8185/2015] 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners/ plaintiffs under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a challenge to the order dated 25.04.2015 passed by the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Dholpur (Raj.) [for short ‘the Civil Court’] in Civil Case No.14/2011, whereby the application filed by the plaintiff on 03.04.2015 under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for seeking amendment in the plaint was dismissed. 2. Heard. 3. Considered the submissions made by the counsel appearing for the petitioners/ plaintiffs. 4. The writ petition was filed in the year 2015 with a challenge to the order dated 25.04.2015 passed by the court below whereby the application filed by the plaintiff under Order VI Rule 17 CPC for seeking amendment in the plaint was dismissed. 5. There was no interim order from this Court and the suit proceedings are continuing regularly. Counsel for the petitioners/ plaintiffs is not in a position to say that what is the present status of the suit proceedings. With the passage of long time of about 10 years, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the impugned order passed by the court below. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed. [2025:RJ-JP:40078] (3 of 3) [CW-8185/2015] 7. Since, the main petition has been dismissed, the stay application and pending application/s, if any, also stand dismissed. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Sharma Nk-Dy. Registrar /69