Hon'ble KOTHARI, J.—This writ petition is directed against the order dtd. 13.7.2001 passed by the learned trial Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) No. 1, Bhilwara in Civil Suit No. 2/1992- Imamuddin (tenant) vs. Prem Kishan S/o Shri Kishan (Plaintiff). By this order, the learned trial Court rejected the application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC filed by the defendants-petitioners Imamuddin seeking amendment in the written statement seeking to add para No. 25 in the written statement.

2. The case appears to have long chequered history of litigation between the parties. However, the short controversy involved before this Court is validity of said order passed by the learned trial Court on 13.7.2001 on an application filed for amendment under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC.

3. The facts relating to the present controversy in brief can be summarized as under:

4. A Civil Suit No. 301/1966 was filed by Mangilal, Chunni Lal and Santosh Kumar S/o of Sh. Laxmi Narayan Agarwal (original tenants) and M/s. Vijay Singh Mithalal, a registered partnership firm and Sh. Imamuddin (sub-tenants)in respect of a suit property situated in Bhilwara. On 3.10.1969, one of the plaintiffs Mangi Lal in civil suit No. 301/1966 is said to have purchased the shops in question from other two plaintiffs through a registered saleded. In the year 1973, one of the aforesaid tenant Shri Kishan is said to have died and thereafter his son Prem Kishan, respondent before this Court in aforesaid writ petition appears to have filed another suit, namely, civil suit No. 202/1976 against Imamuddin and M/s. Vijay Singh Mithalal, a registered partnership firm seeking eviction. On 22.7.1988, this Court stayed the proceedings in said subsequent civil suit No. 202/1976 filed by Prem Kishan till the disposal of the original suit No. 301/1966. On 9.2.1990, the said Mangi Lal sold one shop in question by registered sale-deed to Sh. Imamuddin and on 12.2.1990 after three days sold another shop to Smt. Jubeda W/o Sh. Imamudin by another registered sale deed.

5. On 24.1.2001, the original civil suit No. 301/1966 was dismissed as having abated after the death of Mangi Lal and thus, the stay of subsequent suit No. 202/1976 stood vacated and said subsequent suit which was stayed on 22.7.1988 again revived on 24.1.2001 after a gap of 13 years. After two years on 5.9.2003, the said Imamudin filed an application before the learned trial Court to be substituted in place of deceased Mangi Lal, but the said application was rejected and this Court on 5.9.2003 dismissed S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 191/2000 and 193/2002 and maintained the abatement of civil suit No. 301/1966. On 20.4.2001, the said Imamudin also filed the present application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC and prayed for amendment in his written statement in the aforesaid subsequent suit No. 202/1976 filed by Prem Kishan seeking to incorporate the subsequent developments in the form of purchase of one of the shops from Mangi Lal on 9.2.1990 and another shop by his wife on 12.2.1990. It is this application, which came to be dismissed by the learned trial Court by the impugned order dtd. 13.7.2001 mainly on the ground of said application being belated.

6. Being aggrieved by the said order, the L.Rs. of said Imamudin have approached this Court by way of present writ petition. That earlier a revision petition was filed in this Court challenging the very same order dated 13.7.2001. However, the said revision petition No. 832/2001 was held to be not maintainable by this Court in view of amendment in the CPC and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and accordingly was dismissed on 9.10.2003. The present writ petition was filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in this Court on 16.11.2001.

7. Mr. Vikas Balia, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-legal representatives of said Imamuddin urged that the learned Court below has erred in rejecting the said application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC as belated in suit No. 202/1976 because the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document