ANANTA ROY Vs. KALIPADA GAYEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under article 227 of the Constitution of India the order No. 70, dated 20th July, 2010 passed by the Learned 1st Civil Court (Junior Division), Diamond Harbour in Title Suit No. 123 of 2005 is assailed.

(2.) By the said order impugned the Ld. Trial Court was pleased to consider the application of the present petitioners/defendants for filing additional written statement. It is relevant to mention that the defendant Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7 and 11 filed two petitions dated 10th July, 2009 for permission to file additional written statement as well as acceptance of their additional written statement. The said petitions dated 10th July, 2009 were resisted by the present opposite parties/plaintiffs by filing written objections.

(3.) By the order impugned dated 20th July, 2010 the Ld. Trial Court was pleased to, inter alia observe that the defendants wanted to file the said additional written statement claiming that the 'kha' Schedule suit property belongs to the defendant no. 6 which was partitioned with other non-suit lands on 20.2.1979 and registered on 23rd February, 1979 by registered Partition Deed among the co-sharers, including the defendant No. 6. The defendants claim that the above noted fact of partition was omitted in the original written statement due to bona fide mistake and, therefore, the defendants want to add the said fact and mark the certified copy of the Partition Deed as an exhibit.