Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Sarla Devi & Ors vs Shree Ramshai & Ors on 13 September, 2012
Author: Gopal Krishan Vyas
Bench: Gopal Krishan Vyas
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
ORDER
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1299/2012 (Panna Lal Vs. Shankar lal & Anr) Date of Order :: 13.09.2012 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Moti Singh, for the petitioner.
Mr. B.K. Vyas, for the respondents.
Heard learned counsels for the parties.
Instant writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for following prayer :-
"A. It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed. B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction order may kindly be issued and quashed the order dated 5/12/2011 & 14.12.2011 (annexure-5) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Bhadra in Civil Original Case No. 12/2010 Panna Lal Vs Shankar lal & Anr.
C. By an appropriate writ order or direction that order may kindly be issued and the application filed by respondent defendant under order 6 rule 17 C.P.C may kindly be dismissed regarding amendment in the written statement."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amendment application was filed to delay the trial but the trial court allowed application inspite of the fact that said amendment is not necessary. But without considering this aspect of the matter, trial court wrongly allowed the application for amendment. Therefore, the order of trial court is totally illegal 2 and contrary to law, therefore, the same may be quashed.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent vehemently argued that case is at the stage of recording evidence of the defendants, therefore, virtually trial is at fag end, therefore, at this stage, it is not proper to interfere because after amendment, trial court commenced and at this stage, case is fixed for recording evidence of defendants.
After hearring learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that there is no error in the order passed by the trial court whereby the application filed by the respondents under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC was allowed. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere in the order impugned because the said amendment is necessary for adjudication of controversy. Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed, however, it is made clear that case is at final stage, therefore, trial court shall not frame any fresh issue on the basis of the order passed upon application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC which is impugned in this writ petition and complete the trial within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J.
Bjsh