REETA KUMARI Vs. ANISH RANJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Sidheshwar Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel for the opposite party.

(2.) THE petitioner has filed this civil revision application against the order dated 30.8.2005 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna in Misc. Case No. 2 of 2003, by which the amendment petition dated 29.3.2005 for amendment of the rejoinder petition dated 3.1.2004 of the opposite party has been allowed.

(3.) THEREAFTER , the opposite party filed a petition for amendment of the rejoinder on 29.3.2005, against which the petitioner filed objection. The said application for amendment under Order 6 Rule 17. was allowed by the court below by the impugned order dated 30.8.2005 holding that the petitioner brought her case for setting aside the ex parte decree with averments that she came to know about the ex parte decree on 31.1.2003 from the father of the husband -opposite party during the meeting held between the parties at Patna, which fact was denied by the husband - opposite party and now only claims that his father had gone to Mumbai for treatment and the court came to the conclusion that the proposed amendment is not going to change the nature of the suit and in the ends of justice, it should be allowed so that the party could be fully heard by the court and the petitioner was given liberty to file reply in rebuttal and lead evidence, if so, desired. The same was done on payment (sic) of Rs. 300.00 to the petitioner.