3. In the aforesaid suit, issues were framed and evidence was also started. On behalf of plaintiff, PW-1 was examined in chief and he was also partly cross-examined, and thereafter, the present application in I.A.No.140 of 2009 is filed under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Sections 94(e) and 151 of C.P.C., praying the Court to permit the petitioner-plaintiff to amend his plaint by adding paras 13, 15-A and 16-A to the plaint. By virtue of the relief sought for, the petitioner pleaded for amendment, stating that inspite of the injunction orders granted earlier in his favour, respondent-defendants have trespassed into the plaint schedule property, as such, he sought amendment to add the relief of declaration of title of plaintiff with regard to the suit schedule property and also for recovery of possession, by valuing the suit schedule property at Rs.15,55,200/- being 3/4th of the market value under Section 24(a) of the Court Fee and Suit Valuation Act. The said application is opposed by filing counter affidavit. In the counter, it is the case of respondent-defendants that the present application is filed with all false allegations and if the relief of amendment is allowed, it will change the nature of the suit. It is also pleaded that the relief sought for possession is barred by limitation, as such, they opposed the application on the ground that the Court below has no jurisdiction to entertain the application at this stage.
