Unless it is shown that an amendment would result in a failure of justice, no revision petition should be entertained.

M.M. Kumar, J. - This is a revision petition directed against the order dated 8.2.2002 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Kharar allowing the application of the defendants/respondents for amendment of the written statement. The trial Court allowed the application by recording the following order :

"Perusal of the file shows that the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery against the defendants. As per the allegations of the plaintiff he advanced a loan of Rs. 3,00,0000/- to the defendant No. 1 and this amount of Rs. 3 lacs was paid to the defendant No. 1 through cheque. In the written statement filed by the defendants, it is alleged that a sum of Rs. 2,80,000/- had already been paid in separate instalments in the presence of Ashok Kumar and Madan Lal son of Jai Ram and others. Now, through the proposed amendments the defendants want to allege that before figure Rs. 2,80,000/- the work approximately is to be added. In my opinion if the defendants wants to add the word approximately before the figure 2,80,000/- no prejudice or harm is going to be caused to the plaintiff and in line 3rd of the written statement if the defendants want to insert the word and others after word Jai Ram, even then no hard or prejudice is going to be caused to the plaintiff because the defendants have yet to start their evidence and if they are alleging anything in the written statement, then they are to prove the same. Moreover, the plaintiff will have the fair opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses of the defendants and if in place of 1993 defendants wants to change it with the year 1994 then that is not going to make much difference because the defendant has yet to lead their evidence and again at the cost of repetition, I would like to say that whatever the defendants want to lead it is their duty to prove the same and the plaintiff will have the fair opportunity to cross- examination the witnesses of the defendant. If the defendants wants to omit the words and amount from line 3rd and 6th of the written statement of Para No. 2, even then no harm is going to be caused to the plaintiff because all these facts are to be proved by the defendants. Further the defendants by way of amendments want to omit the words no such affidavit was ever executed in 6th line of para No. 2 of written statement and in its place it should come that However the affidavit mentioned in this para was executed and got attested on 11.3.1994 but the plaintiff had forged the date on it and changed the same 11.3.1994 to 17.3.1994 under the signature of C. Parshad Advocate and introduced another fake witness Yoginder Singh Kanwar who was not present at the time of execution and attestation of the affidavit.

XX XX XX XX XX

XX XX XX XX XX

Moreover the amendments which the defendants are seeking are only a sort of clarification and furthermore, the defendants have yet to lead his evidence and whatever they want to lead by way of amendment they are required to prove the same by leading evidence and in these circumstances, the plaintiff will have an opportunity of cross-examining the witnesses of the defendants and in this way even if these amendments are sought at a later stage, that is not going to cause any harm to the plaintiff. If any law matter is introduced by the defendants by way of amendment, then the plaintiff will have the fair opportunity to rebut that by way of leading rebuttal evidence also. It is always desired, that all those facts and circumstances should come on record which help in solving the controversy between the parties. More technicalities of law should not come in the way. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for plaintiff argued that the predecessor of plaintiff had already filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the defendant and in that complaint, the present defendant, who is accused, has stepped into the witness box as witness and while being cross-examination he admitted c