SONU DUBEY Vs. VIRENDRA KUMAR RAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) In the written statement, defendants No. 2 to 5 inter alia denied the claim of the plaintiffs. It was pleaded that plaintiffs are not related in any manner with the deceased Vishnu Prasad. The plaintiffs adduced their evidence in the year 2009. On 29-1-2009, the case was fixed for recording the defendants' evidence. The defendants No. 2 to 5 filed an application after a period of approximately 4-1/2 years on or about 18-6-2013 seeking amendment of the written statement. By way of proposed amendment, defendants No. 2 to 5 wanted to incorporate the plea that late Vishnu Prasad had executed "Parvarishnama" in favour of defendant No. 2 for her maintenance.

(3.) The trial Court by the impugned order dated 17-7-2013 allowed the application for amendment and held that plaintiffs can be compensated in terms of cost.