KALPANA Vs. HEMENDRA PRATAP SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by way of present revision petition has challenged the order dated 13.3.2006 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Gurgaon declining permission to file additional written statement. The petitioner has moved an application after conclusion of evidence by the petitioner stating therein that while preparing the arguments, it was noticed that the respondent herein has taken new ground in the replication filed by him to the written statement filed by the petitioner and there was no occasion of her to file reply to the same.

(2.) The said application was opposed by the respondent herein on the plea that the said application was not maintainable as her earlier application for amendment of written statement was dismissed by the Court and the revision against the said order was also dismissed. It was contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that filing of application is misuse of the process of the Court and is an attempt to delay the proceedings. It was further claimed that the replication was filed on 7.4.2003 and in spite of expiry of three years no application was moved for filing additional written statement. It was the case of the respondent herein that no written statement could be filed after expiry of 90 days.

(3.) The learned Additional District Judge, Gurgaon came to the conclusion that the replication was filed on 7.4.2003 and no explanation was forthcoming as to why no application thereafter was immediately filed.