PUSHPENDRA KUMAR Vs. MADHU KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against order dt. 30.03.2015 passed by the trial Court, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Order VI, Rule 17 CPC seeking amendment in the written statement has been rejected. The plaintiff -respondent filed a suit for eviction of the petitioner from the suit premises on the ground of bona fide necessity.

(2.) THE petitioner -defendant filed written statement and denied the averments made in the plaint.

(3.) THE petitioner preferred second appeal before this Court, which was dismissed by order dt. 11.09.2008; the petitioner filed application under Order VI, Rule 17 CPC on 14.07.2014 seeking amendment in the written statement; the amendment was sought on the foundational aspect that plaintiff and her family members are involved in purchase and sale of properties and have other properties in Udaipur; it was claimed in the application that during pendency of the suit, the shoe showroom has been renovated and inaugurated on 03.05.2004, property near Delhi Gate, Udaipur has been transferred by plaintiff and other family members.