Dr. B. S. Chauhan, J.—This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 12.11.2003 (Annexure-IV), by which the learned trial court has dismissed the application of the petitioner for amending the written statement.

2. A suit was filed in 1991 by the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 for ejectment and possession in respect of the land in dispute. Petitioners filed the written statement and the trial picked up progress. Present petitioners/defendants filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 25.3.2003, which has been rejected vide impugned judgment and order dated 12.11.2003. Hence this petition.

3. According to the petitioners, the application could not have been dismissed for the reason that the application was bona fide and the amendment, if allowed, would facilitate the conclusion of the trial. Delay cannot be the ground for dismissal of the application.

4. However, the learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 has vehemently opposed it and submitted that the amendment sought to be made was not permissible as the present petitioners miserably failed to explain as to why the pleadings could not have been taken at the ear