MUGUTSAB AND ORS. Vs. KHANSAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 41 of 2012. In a suit filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration of ownership in respect of the suit schedule property, the defendant filed an application in LA. No. III under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking amendment to the written statement filed in the said suit. The Court below by the order impugned dated 19-9-2014, has allowed the application. The plaintiffs claiming to be aggrieved are before this Court. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the order passed by the Court below and also perused the written statement and the nature of the amendment that has been sought. The application is available at Annexure-D to the petition.

(2.) A perusal of the same would indicate that the amendment sought is extensive.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the plaintiffs/petitioners would contend that the application at such a belated stage and more particularly being contrary to the averments which have been made in the original written statement ought not to have been permitted. Learned Counsel for the respondent has however relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which in fact has been referred to by the Court below in its order. Firstly with regard to the legal aspect relating to the amendment, the very principle as applicable to the amendment of a plaint would be applicable even in case of amendment to written statement. However, from the position of law, there cannot be any doubt that the contentions which are contrary to one another can also be urged in the written statement. Despite the said position, what is necessary to be noticed in the instant case is the stage at which the application had been filed and the nature of amendment that has been sought.