( 1 ) THESE two revisions have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 7-12-2001 passed by the Additional District Judge-II, Faizabad in S. C. C. Suit No. 3 of 2000, by which the application 13 (C-2) moved by the plaintiff, who is respondent in these revisions for striking off the defence of the revisionist under Order 15, Rule 5 has been allowed and the amendment application 17 (A), which was moved by the defendant revisionist for amendment in the written statement, has been rejected.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff respondent had filed a caveat on behalf of opposite party No. 1, therefore, Shri Vijay Bahadur Verma appeared for him.

( 3 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionist defendant, Shri Hari Prakash Srivastava and for the respondent-plaintiff, Shri Vijay Bahadur Verma at quite length.

( 4 ) SINCE the order has been passed on the same date i. e. 7-12-2001 and one formal order has been prepared on these applications, therefore, these revisions are being decided by this common order.

( 5 ) THE brief facts of the case are that the respondent-plaintiff has filed a suit before the Judge, Small Causes Court for arrears of rent, damages and evict