NEETU GOEL Vs. YOGESH GOEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 06.04.2012 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the written statement, is under challenge. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the proposed amendment in para No. 2 of the preliminary objections, has already been pleaded in para No. 18 of the written statement, but just to make clarification of the preliminary objections, the petitioner wanted to make necessary amendment in para No. 2 of the preliminary objections.

(2.) The adversary contends that the respondent has already filed rejoinder to the written statement and the trial has already commenced, therefore, the petitioner cannot be allowed to amend her written statement. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on the judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases Raj Kumar Gurawara (dead) through L.Rs. v. S.K. Sarwagi and Company Private Limited and another, 2008 4 RCR(Civ) 824 and Vidyabai and others v. Padmalatha and another, 2009 1 RCR(Civ) 763.

(3.) Heard. Both the parties accept that the evidence of the petitioner had already commenced at the time when this application was filed.