SATYNARAYAN Vs. VINETELAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HE is heard on admission.

(2.) HE submitted that the previous written statement filed by the petitioner was scanty and, therefore, for elaborating the plea, the petitioner moved an application for amendment of the written statement in view of the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17, CPC. However, the Court rejected it and therefore, this petitioner has been left with no way but to move this Court in its revisional jurisdiction,

(3.) SHRI Jain pointed out the previous written statement as well as the proposed amendment.