RAJINDER GOPAL Vs. GOWARSONS PUBLISHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the Trial Court allowing amendments in the written statement, the present Civil Revision Petition has been Filed by the pluinlifls/ petitioners.

(2.) It has been contended by Mr.Tyagi, learned, counsel appearing for the petitioners that the suit was instituted on 26.2.1996, the written statement was tiled on 8th August, 1996, and, thereafter, in view of certain admissions made by the defendant with regard lo execution of Agreement to Lei, the rate of rent, the terms and conditions thereto, the petitioner Filed anapplication under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Code and the pleadings in that application was also completed. After the said application was filed, the respondent Filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code to amend the written statement. .

(3.) It has been contended before me by Mr.Tyagi, learned counsel for the petitioners that the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code Filed by the respondent was an abuse of process of Court and the same was mala Fide as no such plea was taken either in .the written statement originally Filed by the respondent or in the reply Filed to the application under Order 12 Rule 6 of Civil Procedure Code Filed by the petitioner. In support of his contention, Mr.Tyagi has cited KedarNath & Ors.vs. Ram.Perkasll & ors.1999 RLR 45, a Full Bench Decision of Ms Court. and S.Thanugupan vs. P.Padmavathy JT 1999(6)SC 464.