GURNAM SINGH Vs. BANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioners challenge the order of the learned trial court (Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Rajpura), dated 21.7.2016, by which their application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC, seeking an amendment of their written statement, has been dismissed, on the ground that the application was moved at a stage after the plaintiffs had even closed their evidence on 4.9.2015, the application having been filed on 6.5.2016, (erroneously shown to be 6.5.2015 in the impugned order).

(2.) Notice of motion having been issued in this petition on 24.9.2016, with at that stage no interim order having been passed in favour of the petitioners. However, on an application seeking stay of proceedings before the trial court, this court, vide an order passed on 31.5.2019, had directed that court to adjourn the matter to a date beyond that given by this court at that stage. That interim order was continued thereafter.

(3.) Vide an order dated 24.2.2020, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner-defendants had been noticed, to the effect that the amendment sought to be incorporated in their written statement was that the legal representatives of plaintiff no.2, i.e. presently respondents no.2 (i) to (iii), had exchanged their share in the suit land with the petitioners on 25.1.2016 and consequently, an amendment to that effect was very much required to be made.