INDER SEN ISRANI, J.—-This is a revision petition against the order dated 9.1.1987 passed by the learned Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City, whereby he dismissed the application of the petitioner filed under Order 6 Rule 17 for amendment of written statement.

2. The non-petitioner has filed a civil suit for eviction against the petitioner on the ground of reasonable and bonafide necessity for the suit premises described in para 2 of the plaint. These allegations have been denied by the defendant-petitioner. The petitioner filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. dated 5. 1. 1985, which was opposed by the non-petitioner and was dismissed as stated above.

3. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and also perused the order of the lower court as also the proposed amendment, which is reproduced in para 4 of the petition.

4. Mr. N. M. Ranjjan learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that it has been proposed in the amendment that a hall measuring 100 east-west and 40 north-south is lying vacant with the non-petitioner, in which large crowd can sit and listen to devotional songs etc. and Rishi Munies can also rest there. Therefore, s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document