ASHOK KUMAR SINGH Vs. AHILYA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Dharmendra Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.N. Saxena, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ashok Singh, learned Counsel for the respondents. Through this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 7.8.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, Jaunpur by which petitioner's amendment application No. 230 Ka for amending the written statement has been rejected.

(2.) Through the amendment application the petitioner has sought for adding ground No. 21-B after paragraph 21 of the written statement by stating that in the year 2008-09 in the back portion of the disputed premises the landlord respondent has started a business known as Max Vijai Limited and, therefore, the requirement on which the release was sought has vanished. The respondent has filed objection stating therein that for bringing on record the subsequent events, the amendment in the written statement is not necessary. Number of decisions were placed before the learned Judge for and against by the parties and ultimately the learned Judge has rejected the petitioner's application taking note of the fact that the appeal is pending since 1999 and various administrative circulars and judicial orders have been issued/passed for disposal of the old cases at the earliest possible.

(3.) While assailing this order Sri Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Additional District Judge has erred in rejecting the petitioner's amendment application only on account of pendency of the appeal since 1999 without addressing himself on merit of the amendment application.