RAMJILAL CHANDIL Vs. RAMKATORI AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the orders Annexure-P/5 dated 28/02/2011 and Annexure-P/8 dated 02/05/2011.

(2.) The petitioner, who is defendant before the Court below preferred an application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. Annexure-P/3, which was rejected by the Court below by order dated 28/02/2011. The petitioner again filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C Annexure-P/6, which is again decided by the Court below by impugned order dated 02/05/2011.

(3.) Shri Aniket Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on aforesaid amendment applications submits that by way of aforesaid amendments, the petitioner wanted to add additional defence in the written statement. Learned counsel submits that the Court below erred in rejecting the said application. The orders are under challenge by Shri Naik on the following grounds:- (1) the trial Court was not proceeded much and was not in a stage, where such an amendment became impermissible (2) additional defence was sought to be added by way of amendment, which could not have been rejected (3) the Court below has erred in rejecting the said applications and while doing so, committed a further error of law in dealing with the merits of the said application. No prejudice would be caused to the other side, if amendment is allowed. He relied on Andhra Bank Vs. ABN Amro Bank N.V. & others, 2007 AIR(SC) 2511and Baldev Singh and others Vs. Manohar Singh and another, 2006 6 SCC 498.