JUDGMENT :

B.P. DESHPANDE, J.

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The matter is taken up for final disposal with consent at the admission stage itself.

3. By way of present petition, the petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 13/02/2020, passed by the First Appellate Court, thereby rejecting prayer for amendment of the written statement.

4. Mr. Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that the amendment which is sought is only clarificatory in nature. He submits that the petitioner/defendant No. 1 is illiterate pardanashin lady and therefore, she was unable to understand the pleadings in the written statement filed by her in the suit.

5. Mr. Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that suit was filed by the respondent No. 1/plaintiff for declaration and possession of the suit plot, wherein the petitioner/defendant No. 1 contested the matter. However, her specific defence raised regarding gift deed by which the suit property was gifted to her by the plaintiff, is not accepted only because there are no proper pleadings in the written statement with regard to the description of stamp, the date of execution of gift de