It is the petitioner’s case, before the Court below, that he had sought a mandatory injunction directing defendants 1 and 2 to demolish the shed shown as PLS in the site shown as “EGHF” on the NH-5 Road margin after ejecting the defendants therefrom; the defendants had stated that the Government had permitted them to install a tea stall; D.W.1, in her examination, had specifically stated that the Government had accorded permission for constructing a thatched hut for running a tea bunk; after completion of trial, and while arguing the matter, the Court entertained a doubt whether the Suit was bad for non-joinder of necessary parties; and, in such circumstances, amendment of the cause title was necessitated. The respondents-defendants, in their counter affidavit, contended that a specific plea was taken in the written statement filed in the year 2002 regarding their being permitted to raise a shed by the Government; the revision petitioner herein had kept quiet for more than seven years and it was only when the matter was at the stage of final disposal, i.e., trial was concluded and arguments were heard, that the present application was filed.
