SANJEEV KUMAR SINHA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the time of hearing no one appeared on behalf of wife respondent No. 2 Archana Singh, hence, only the arguments of learned Counsel for the husband-petitioner were heard.

(2.) THROUGH this writ petition order dated 25. 4. 2001 has been challenged. The said order was passed by XV Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad in Marriage Petition No. 314 of 1998. Through the said order application of husband-plaintiff petitioner seeking amendment in the plaint was rejected. Marriage petition had initially been filed in district Jhujhnu, situate in Rajasthan. Thereafter through order of Supreme Court the said petition was transferred to Ghaziabad.

(3.) THE first ground on which amendment application has been rejected is that the original petition is drafted in Hindi (Devnagri Script) while the amendment application has been filed in English. In my opinion, the view of the Court below is not correct. It would have been more appropriate if amendment application had been filed in same language and script in which plaint was drafted, however, on this technical ground amendment could not be rejected.