SAHNAZ PARVEEN Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr Surya Kant, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr A.R. Khan, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 1.3.2006, passed by the Additional District Judge, Lucknow in Civil Revision No.374 of 2005. By means of order impugned the petitioner's revision filed against the order dated 6th July, 2005, passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) has been rejected with the direction to the trial court to dispose of the application for amendment A -30 as per direction issued by the revisional court.

(3.) ON the next date fixed on 28.2.2005 the respondent no.1/ defendant no. 1 filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 C.P.C. for amendment of the written statement on the ground that inadvertently due to incidental slip he could not mention the facts of the proposed amendment in his written statement. The trial court by means of order dated 6.7.2003 rejected the application for amendment saving certain clerical amendments on the ground that the application for amendment was presented after commencement of trial. Further the respondent/ defendant no. 1 has failed to establish that he was diligent but could not raise these pleas before the commencement of trial due to inadvertent mistake. The trial court further observed that in the matter the issues have been framed and thus the trial has commenced. Aggrieved defendant challenged the order of the trial court before the Court of the District Judge, Lucknow through Civil Revision No.374 of 2005.