LAKHWINDER SINGH Vs. JAGTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition directs challenge against order dated 05.07.2017 (Annexure P-5) whereby application filed by the petitioner/defendant for amendment of written statement has been declined.

(2.) Jagtar Singh-respondent has filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 4,68,480/- on the plea that petitioner/defendant borrowed an amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- on the basis of pronote and receipt dated 17.03.2011 and agreed to pay interest at the rate of 1.56% per month but failed to return the amount despite repeated requests. The petitioner/defendant filed the written statement and, in turn, denied taking loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- and having executed the pronote and receipt on 17.03.2011 with further averment that the pronote and receipt are forged and fabricated documents. The original written statement was filed on 15.04.2015 and the instant application for amendment of the written statement was filed on 20.03.2017 at the time when the case was fixed for evidence of the petitioner/defendant, after respondent/plaintiff had already concluded his evidence.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in case the proposed amendment is allowed, the petitioner would not pray for recalling witnesses of the respondent/plaintiff already examined in order to confront them with the facts sought to be added by way of amendment. It is further submitted that as onus to prove the facts sought to be added by way of amendment would be on the petitioner/defendant, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent/plaintiff in case the proposed amendment is allowed for adding certain facts reproduced in para 2 of the impugned order. The last submission made by counsel is that scope of amendment of written statement is much larger than that of a plaint, therefore, the application may be allowed.