MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GWALIOR Vs. KRISHNA DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution assails the order dated 4.4.2005, whereby the application under Order 6 Rule 17, CPC, preferred by the decree- holder in Case No.183/89 x 92 was allowed.

(2.) SHRI S.S.Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that amendment application should not have been allowed by the court below. He contends that the petitioner- Corporation submitted reply to the amendment application (Annexure P/5) and in the light of this reply, the court below has erred in allowing the application.

(3.) DURING the course of hearing, it is noticed that in this petition the Municipal Corporation has not even chosen to file the amendment application which has been allowed by Annexure P/1. Annexure P/5 is projected as reply to the amendment application, which has been allowed. However, the reply, Annexure P/5, does not contain any date. Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to establish that this Annexure P/5 is the reply of the amendment application, which has been allowed. The decree- holder along with his reply has filed the amendment application (Annexure R/10) which has been allowed. In his reply, he specifically pleaded that Annexure P/5 is not the reply of the amendment application which has been allowed. In para 5.8 of the reply, it is contended that the petitioner has mentioned wrong facts. An amendment application dated 28.4.2005 was filed and Annexure P/5 is the reply of that application and not the reply of the application dated 1.12.2004 which is allowed. Shri Gautam is unable to show that said averment is incorrect.