KRISHNA PANDEY Vs. SHEO SHANKAR PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application by the defendants -petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 5.2.2007 passed by Sub -Judge -II, Daltonganj at Palamu in Partition Suit No. 29 of 1997 whereby the prayer for amendment of the written statement has been rejected.

(2.) PLAINTIFF -respondent No. 1 filed the aforementioned Partition Suit No. 29 of 1997 against the defendants for decree of 1/6th share in the suit property. The defendants contested the suit by filing written statement. After closure of the evidence, defendant Nos. 6 and 7 (petitioners herein) filed application purported to be under Order VI, Rule 17, CPC stating, inter alia, that due to bona fide mistake, some incorrect facts have been stated in para 3 of the written statement not supported with the documents. It was, therefore, necessary to incorporate the correct facts. The said prayer was rejected by the Court below.

(3.) THE case of the petitioners -defendant Nos. 6 and 7 in paragraph 3 of the written statement was that both the brothers inherited the property of their 'NANA' of village Ranka Kala under Khata No. 283 area 11. 58 acres and under Khata No. 233 area 0.08 acres and Gulab Pandey and sons of Banwari Pandey are in peaceful possession over the half of the property, but the same has not been included in the present partition suit. Accordingly, suit for partition over the partial lands without the permission of the Court cannot be allowed to be continued. By way of amendment, the said defendants wanted to introduce a new fact which reads as under: