ORDER:- This revision has been filed by Shambhu Nath Seth in the following circumstances:

2. Madan Lal and Barati Lal opposite parties filed a suit against him for ejectment from a certain house. After evidence had been led by the parties and arguments were going to be heard defendant Shambhu Nath Seth moved an application for amendment of the written statement with a view to take a plea that the house in dispute belonged jointly to the plaintiffs and their father and, therefore, the notice served upon the defendant was invalid because father had not joined in it. This application was rejected by the Munsif on the sole ground that it was filed at

a very late stage. Shambhu Nath Seth filed a revision before the District Judge, Sitapur. The revision was dismissed by the District Judge with the observation that it was not necessary to amend the pleadings because the defendant had already disputed validity of the notice in the written statement and this additional plea could also be raised in arguments.

3. I have heard Sri H.N. Tilhari for the revisionist and Sri R.N. Trivedi for the opposite parties. This is a clear case in which the courts below failed to exercise jurisdiction vested in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document