BHABA SHANKAR DAS Vs. SATYA SHANKAR DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioners is that by amending the plaint in a suit for declaration of title relating to an immovable property and by amending the written statement in a subsequent partition suit, where both suits are being tried analogously, the plaintiff in the previous suit and one of the defendants in the subsequent partition suit, both persons being the same, has been permitted to retract his admission contained in the plaint and the relevant written statement, respectively. The plaintiff in the earlier suit and the defendant No. 1 in the subsequent partition suit, who is the opposite party No. 1 herein, is represented. It is submitted by the opposite party No. 1 that neither the relevant plaint nor the relevant written statement was sought to be altered in a drastic manner to alter the character thereof; but the opposite party No. 1 only attempted to say that records and documents subsequently discovered by such party demonstrate a position which is contrary to the perception of the opposite party No. 1 as reflected in the original pleadings.

(2.) Though the ground urged by the petitioners herein is appreciated, yet it cannot be said that no admission made in the pleadings can be retracted or resiled from even upon a suitable explanation being indicated in such regard. However, there is substance in the petitioners' assertion that by deleting the admission from the relevant pleadings, the opposite party No. 1 herein was seeking to steal a march in the sense that the contrary case run at two different stages would not be evident from the pleadings.

(3.) Since it appears that the substance of the amendments sought was to retract from the admission of the title to a part of the land of the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners herein, and such retraction is on account of the alleged discovery of subsequent material by the opposite party No. 1 herein, the interest of justice may be sub-served if the orders impugned are set aside and the opposite party No. 1 in either case is permitted to apply afresh for amendment of the plaint and the written statement, respectively, with the rider that by the suggested amendment nothing will be deleted from the plaint or the relevant written statement, but further material may be added thereto with an explanation as to why the opposite party No. 1 was seeking to take a stand contrary to his earlier stated stand in the pleadings.