RAM AGARWAL Vs. B JAGANNATH RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE civil revision petition was admitted on 19. 4. 2008 and in CRP mpno. 2166/2008 interim stay had been granted.

(2.) THE unsuccessful petitioner-defendant in IA No. 1163/2007 in OS no. 2050/2006 aggrieved by the order made by the H-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, hyderabad dated 13. 3. 2008, dismissing the application filed by him under Order VI rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter in short referred to as 'the Code' for the purpose of convenience), had preferred the present civil revision petition under Article 227 of the constitution of India.

(3.) SRI Murlinarayan Bung, the learned Counsel representing the revision petitioner would maintain that the view expressed by the learned II-Senior Civil judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, that the effect of allowing the proposed amendment would amount to withdrawal of the admissions cannot be sustained. The learned counsel also would maintain that in the written statement always alternative pleas and even inconsistent pleas can be taken, when that being so, on the ground that allowing amendment of written statement would have the effect of the withdrawal of the admissions cannot be sustained. Even otherwise, there is no withdrawal of admissions as such and in fact, clarificatory stand had been further explained by virtue of the proposed paras which were sought to be introduced by way of amendment in the written statement. The learned Counsel also had taken this Court through the relevant portions of the order impugned in the CRP and further placed strong reliance on certain decisions to substantiate his submissions.