( 2025:HHC:9102 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CMPMO No. 60 of 2024. Decided on : 4 th April, 2025. Dr.K.K. Parmar ...Petitioner. Himachal Pradesh Urban Development Authority & Ors. ....Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satyen Vaidya, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Mukul Sood, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. C.N. Singh, Advocate, Dr.Nidhi Singh and Mr. Anshul Gandhi, Advocates for respondent No.1. Mr. Rajnish Maniktala, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Dinkar Bhaskar, Advocate, for respondent No.2. Satyen Vaidya, Judge (Oral). By way of this petition, challenge has been laid to order dated 18.12.2023 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Palampur in CMA No. 690 of 2023. 2. Learned trial Court vide impugned order has dismissed the application of the plaintiff (petitioner herein) for amendment of issues. Learned trial Court has held that the additional issues sought to be framed by the plaintiff were not 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? required as the pleas raised in that behalf were already covered under issues No.1 and 2 framed on 16.04.2021. 3. Noticeably, the application for amendment of issues was preferred by the plaintiff after closure of his evidence in affirmative. In such circumstances, it is difficult to comprehend that what prejudice was being faced by the plaintiff at that stage of the suit, when he had already led his evidence and it was a case where plaint had not been amended. Plaintiff knew his case and must have led evidence to prove the facts, the burden of which was on him. 4. Learned trial Court has rightly exercised its discretion, as it had not found any reason to amend the issues. 5. There being no illegality, perversity or error of jurisdiction, no interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution is required and the petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Satyen Vaidya) Judge 4th April, 2025. (jai) …2… ( 2025:HHC:9102 )