LAKSHMAMMA Vs. CHIKKANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners � plaintiffs filed a suit for partition in the year 2007. In the year 2010, an application under Order - 6, Rule � 17, read with Section � 151 of C.P.C., was filed seeking amendment of the plaint. By the impugned order the trial Court rejected the same. Hence, the present petition.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners contend that the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set-aside. That the fact sought to be amended was not within their knowledge and that they came to know of the same only when the written statement was filed. Hence, the application requires to be allowed.

(3.) ON hearing the learned counsels and on examining the impugned order, I do not find any error committed by the trial Court that calls for interference. What is sought to be amended is the explanation to the plea of the plaint. The burden of proving the Will has been cast upon the defendants in terms of issue no.1. There is no issue on the plaintiffs, which they are called upon to prove. Under these circumstances, the amendment sought for is not necessary.