Chattisgarh High Court
Ritesh Kumar Agrawal vs Smt. Payal Agrawal 10 Wpc/2759/2019 ... on 9 August, 2019
Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal
Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WP227 No. 626 of 2019
Ritesh Kumar Agrawal, aged about 34 years, S/o Shri Natwarlal
Agrawal, R/o Ward No. 05, In front of Durga Temple Baradwar,
Police Station Baradwar, Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa,
Chhattisgarh. Mo. No. 7000388039, 9993775004.
---- Petitioner/Plaintiff
Versus
Smt. Payal Agrawal, Aged about 33 years, W/o Ritesh Kumar
Agrawal, R/o C-2, Sun Flower Tower, Beside in Krishna Public
School, Mangla Chowk Bilaspur, Police Station Civil Lines,
Tahsil & District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
At present R/o B-7, Ashoka Park, Shankar Nagar, Raipur,
Tahsil, Civil & Revenue District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
----Respondent/Defendant
For Petitioner : Mr. Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 09.08.2019
1. By the impugned order dated 31/07/2019, learned Additional Principal Family Judge, Bilaspur has allowed the application filed by the respondent/defendant under Order 6 Rule 17 of the CPC for amendment in her written statement against which this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by him.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff submits that the application filed by the respondent/defendant under Order 6 Rule 7 of the CPC has been allowed by the family Court after closure of plaintiff's evidence and as such, plaintiff will not be 2 entitled to raise pleadings on the amended portion of the written statement and consequently, he will suffer prejudice if he is not allowed to amend his plaint and to give his statement on the amended portion of the written statement.
3. I have learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff, considered his submissions and perused the records.
4. Learned family Court has assigned sufficient and valid reasons for allowing the application filed by the respondent/defendant under Order 6 Rule 7 of the CPC, as such, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. However, the petitioner/plaintiff will be entitled to amend his plaint and to adduce additional evidence to the extent of the amendment that has been incorporated by the respondent/defendant in her written statement.
5. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s).
Sd/-
(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet