SHAMBHU DAYAL Vs. SHRI NAND LAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of the trial court dated 7.1.1988 whereby the application for amendment of the written statement was allowed.

(2.) CIVIL Suit was filed on 8.12.1979 whereas the written statement was filed by Mohinder Singh defendant on 11.2.1980. The present application for amendment of the written statement was filed on 23.12.1987 alleging that the plaintiff took the plot in dispute from Lajja Dass on rent and the said plot is part of Rectangle No. 70, Killa No. 35/1 -37/2. The said Lajja Dass had filed a suit for possession which was dismissed on 16.1.1974. Thus he sought amendment to the fact that the suit land is part of Rectangle No. 70. The application was resisted on the ground that the same has been filed mala fide and the defendant wants to take contradictory pleas' and as such should not be allowed. The allegations made in the application were denied to be false and baseless. The trial court allowed the said amendment with the observations:

(3.) AFTER hearing the counsel for the parties I find merit in this petition. After holding that the defendant was negligent on his part, the trial Court should not have allowed the amendment, particularly without giving any cogent reasons. Nobody is entitled to the amendment of the pleadings as a matter of right. Delay is a factor to be explained by the party seeking any amendment. If the court is satisfied then in a given case the may be allowed but not otherwise. In the present case, nothing was stated in the application seeking amendment nor there was any cogent reason for allowing the amendment sought for. The sit is pending for the last ten years and the whole effort on the part of the defendant appears to be to delay the proceedings on one reason or the other. Consequently, this petition succeeds, the impugned order is set aside and the application for amendment is dismissed with costs.