MOULA BOZ SK Vs. ABDUL MANNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two applications are disposed of by this common judgment as the two applications have arisen out of the identical matter.

(2.) FOR convenience, I am discussing the C.O. No.2028 of 2006. C.O. No.2028 of 2006:- This revisional application is directed against the order no.55 dated February 24, 2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Lalbagh in Misc. Case No.137 of 1988 thereby allowing an application for amendment of the written statement.

(3.) I find that if the application for amendment of the written objection dated February 16, 2005 stands allowed, the effect would be the withdrawal of the admission made by the opposite party earlier to the effect that the lands in case had not been partitioned by metes and bounds. So, if the amendment is allowed, the petitioners will be prejudiced. It will also cause injustice to the petitioners. Therefore, the specific admission of the opposite parties in the written objection cannot be allowed to be withdrawn by the subsequent amendment. The impugned order, therefore, cannot be supported.