Muhammad Alam Khan, J.--Mian Awdal son of Kabal Malik resident of Kabal District Swat has brought this writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 wherein he has challenged the order dated 9.12.2006 passed by the Civil Judge Swat and order dated 16.6.2008 passed by the learned District Judge Swat refusing to grant permission to the petitioner to amend the plaint in a pending suit titled Mian Awdal Vs. Muhammad Jan and others in the Civil Court Swat.
2. Briefly narrated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff has brought a suit regarding land measuring 01 Kanal 13 Marlas Khasras No,279 and 291 situated in village Dardyal Tehsil Kabai District Swat to be his ownership and prayed for decree for permanent injunction asking to restrain the defendants not to stop the irrigation flow to a water Mill owned and possessed by the petitioner. The defendant submitted written statement wherein the allegations were hotly contested and the parties produced their pro and contra evidence.
3. The learned Civil Judge in order to determine the location of the suit property appointed a Local Commissioner to ascertain whether the suit property is situated in the said number Khasras or not?.
4. Mr. Amanullah than, Advocate learned counsel/Local Commissioner inspected the spot in presence of the parties and the learned Local Commissioner submitted a detailed report firstly that number Khasra 279 is situated towards the eastern side and is a water course while there is no abadi in number khasra 291. However, there is a demolished House situated in number khasra 279, which is in dilapidated condition for the last 16 years. The learned Local Commissioner came to the conclusion that the correct number khasra in which the right of flow of water can be claimed by the petitioner is number khasra 265 which is not in dispute. In this respect the learned. Local Commissioner recorded the statement of the plaintiff/petitioner as well as his witness namely Akbar Khan. In this situation the plaintiff submitted an application for amendment of the plaint, which was rejected, and the same order was maintained by the learned District Judge, Swat in Revision No, 5 of 2007 decided on 16.6.2008.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the amendment can be granted by a Court at any time under the provisions of order 6, Rule 17 CPC and the learned two Courts below have not exercised the discretion properly.
6. We have gone through the record of the case and have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. The suit was instituted on 7.2.2001 and during the long span of 8 years the petitioner did not bother to sue for the correct number khasra. Furthermore impugned before us is an interim order of amendment, against which no writ petition is competent and lastly amendment at the belated stage cannot be granted as held in the case of Ministry Muhammad Ramzan Vs. Noor Muhammad and avo others, (PLD 1995 Quetta 5).
8. The orders impugned herein are strictly in accordance with law, based on equity and justice, which cannot be interfered with by this Court in its extra ordinary Constitutional jurisdiction.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case narrated above, we find no merits in the instant petition, which is dismissed in limine.