MOHAMMED ABDUL WAHID Vs. NILOGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner is the original plaintiff who has filed suit for declaration with regard to his share in the suit property with a further prayer for a preliminary decree of partition, separate possession and perpetual injunction.

(3.) The respondent No.1 herein filed her written statement opposing the claim as made in the suit. During pendency of the suit, the plaintiff moved an application under provisions of Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, the Code) seeking leave to amend the plaint. By said amendment, the schedule of the suit property and some paragraphs after para 13 were sought to be amended. The trial Court by the order dated 1.4.2015 allowed the said application and also permitted the defendants to consequentially amending their pleadings. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the defendant No.1 moved an application below Exhibit 139 praying that the consequential amendment to the written statement be allowed. In this application besides the reply to the amended plaint, para 37A was also sought to be amended in the written statement. The trial Court by order dated 27.7.2015 partly allowed the said application. It permitted the defendant no.1 to carry out the consequential amendment to paras 35B, 35C and 35D. The amendment in the other paras was not granted but liberty was granted with to move a separate application in that regard. An application for review filed by the defendant no.1 came to be rejected.