1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.

2. The petitioner is the defendant and he is before this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the Trial Court dated 27.07.2017 rejecting the application, I.A.No.11, preferred under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC.

3. The Trial Court has rejected the application on the ground that the present application amounts to inventing a new ground of defence and it does not amount of elaboration and that too the same is filed after the death of defendant No.7, which creates a suspicion. Further held that as recording of evidence has already commenced, the application is barred by the proviso.

4. Prima facie the reasoning rendered by the Court below is unsustainable. The Trial Court has failed to see that the amendment, is sought in respect of a written statement and the law as to whether the amendment of a plaint and the amendment of written statement do not stand on a similar footing is no more res-integra. Further, the Trial Court erred in rendering a finding on the merits of the proposed amendment itself. On both these counts, the impugned order is contrary to the law settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

5. In the authori