PANDIT RAMGOPAL PUJARI Vs. PANDIT AKHILESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the validity of impugned order dated 18-11-2010 (Annexure-P/11) passed by learned trial Court, whereby, application filed by defendant/petitioner under Order VI, Rule 17, Civil Procedure Code and another application under Order VIII, Rule 1, Civil Procedure Code have been rejected.

(2.) A suit for declaration of the share and the partition has been filed by plaintiffs, who are respondents in this petition. The petitioner who is brother of plaintiff/respondent No. 1 filed written statement and inter alia pleaded in para 8 that real intention of plaintiffs is to harass and torture the defendant mentally.

(3.) The contention of Shri Dhagat learned counsel for petitioner is that application to amend the written statement (Annexure-P/3) was submitted at the stage when the evidence of plaintiffs was not recorded. Learned counsel further submits that by the proposed amendment, the petitioner is explaining the pleading which he had already pleaded in para 8 of written statement and therefore said application ought to have been allowed by the Trial Court. Learned counsel further submits that in order to support the proposed amendment another application under Order VIII, Rule 1, Civil Procedure Code was filed by filing copy of FIR, agreement and affidavit. Learned counsel further submits that this application has also been mechanically dismissed.