AMBROSE Vs. NEELA MEGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioners/Defendants have filed the present Civil Revision Petition as against the Order dated 03.02.2010 in I.A.No.33 of 2009 in O.S.No.85 of 2004 passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Ariyalur, in dismissing the Application (filed by the Petitioners/Defendants) under Order 8 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for permission to receive the Additional Written Statement.

(2.) THE Learned Counsel for the Petitioners/Defendants submits that the trial Court has committed an error in dismissing I.A.No.33 of 2009 in O.S.No.85 of 2004 (praying for permission of the Court to receive the Additional Written Statement) on the ground that the Petitioners are not entitled for obtaining an Order, as prayed for and further, the alleged fact pleaded in the Additional Written Statement is one which is new set of facts, cannot be allowed to be introduced in the suit, when the suit is that too in Part Heard Stage and the said reason so assigned by the trial Court is not within the four parameters of law.

(3.) IT is the plea of the Petitioners/Defendants that the averments "the pucca Well 70 feet depth and a septic tank about 12 feet length, are not found within the four boundaries of the suit property " are not earlier made mention of in the Original Written Statement filed by the Revision Petitioners/Defendants and by introduction of these averments for which permission is sought for from the Court, if such permission is granted by the trial Court and consequently, the Petitioners/Defendants are permitted to receive the Additional Written Statement, then, no prejudice will be caused to any one much less the Respondent/Petitioner.