NARESH KUMAR Vs. MEER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 23rd May, 2018 by which the application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment in the written statement has been rejected by the Trial Court. The suit has had a long and chequered history. The suit was filed for specific performance in 2005 and Mr. Naresh Kumar - the Petitioner herein/Defendant (hereinafter Defendant) and Ms. Raj Rani filed applications for impleadment in 2006. The said applications were initially dismissed. However, the ld. Division Bench vide order dated 28th November, 2012 allowed the impleadment in the following terms:

(2.) As per the above order, a limited right was given to the Petitioner herein who was one of the persons seeking impleadment to file a written statement and to participate in the proceedings. However, it appears from the events that have transpired that the Petitioner filed a written statement which was according to the Respondent/Plaintiff beyond the directions of the ld. Division Bench. The same was rejected initially but was thereafter allowed by the Division Bench, finally culminating in an order dated 2nd February, 2015 passed by the Supreme Court. Thus, between 2012 when the initial written statement was directed to be filed till 2015, a three-year delay was caused by the Petitioner herein in filing the written statement.

(3.) Thereafter, the suit was transferred to the District Court and additional issues were framed. The Plaintiff filed its affidavits by way of evidence and a Local Commissioner was appointed for recording the evidence. An application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC was then filed by Mr. Naresh Kumar at the time when the Plaintiff's evidence had commenced. The same was rejected by the Trial Court. The said order dated 23rd May, 2018 rejecting the application for amendment is under challenge before this Court.