Amendments to pleadings cannot be allowed after a long delay without valid justification.

Manmohan Singh, J.

1. The petitioner (defendant in the suit) has assailed the order dated 15th February, 2013 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC seeking amendment of the written statement was dismissed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent (plaintiff in the suit) filed a suit for permanent injunction against dispossession of the respondent from the suit property without due process of law in May, 1995. The petitioner filed its written statement, raising various objections, in December, 1996.

3. By way of application for amendment, the petitioner submitted that in the written statement the suit property had been inadvertently mentioned to be a part of Khasra No.63, of the revenue estate of Village Patti Hamid Sarai instead of Khasra No.64 of the same revenue estate. Therefore, it sought to amend para 4 of preliminary objections and para 2 of the reply on merits to this effect. It was also stated in the application that the said amendment will not change the stand of the DDA and was necessary for determining the real questions in controversy between the parties.

4. The contention of the respondent was that the application for amendment filed by the petitioner was an afterthought and an attempt to resile from the admissions after a gap of 16 years. There was no explanation on behalf of the petitioner for seeking the amendment.

5. The learned trial court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner on the reasons given in paras 5 to 7 of the impugned order which read as under:

“5. The only amendment that DDA is seeking is regarding the change of khasra no. from 63 to 64. It is pertinent to appreciate here that DDA filed its WS on 18.12.1996 in which it has admitted that the suit property falls in khasra no.63, which is also the case of the plaintiff. It is settled law that amendment can not be restored to for withdrawing admissions made in the pleadings. Moreover, there is absolutely no mention of what has struck DDA after nearly 16 years to say that the suit property falls in khasra no.64 and an error has been made in the written statement. There is no explanation how DDA has come to this conclusion so as to resile from its earlier stand. It is also relevant to note that P.E has already been closed in the present matter and the application is highly belated.

6. Ld. SLO has drawn attention towards documents filed by DDA which talk about khasra no.64. However, these documents also talk about khasra no.63 and therefore this argument of Ld. SLO does not hold much water.

7. Another contention of Ld. SLO, though not part of the application is that an earlier suit by plaintiff was withdrawn due to technical defect and therefore even DDA should be allowed to amend the written statement. I am unable to gather any legal force in this contention.”

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the material placed on record and impugned order.

7. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the amendments sought by the petitioner should have been allowed as the courts should be liberal while condoning the delay in case of State which depends upon its officials for its actions. He has referred to the case of Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Ors. vs. Subrata Borah Chowlek and Ors., (2010) 14 SCC 419.

8. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the learned trial court rightly dismissed the application filed by the petitioner as the petitioner is trying to resile from its admission after a gap of 16 years in the garb of amendment sought by it.

9. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent had filed a suit for permanent injunction against the DDA on the ground that respondent is the absolute owner in possession of property No.134-A/1 measuring 380 sq.yards comprised in Khasra No.63 situated within the abadi of Village Begum Pur, New D