Back
1999 Supreme(All) 1867
High Court Of Allahabad
S.N. Aggarwal, J.
Dhiraj Singh
Vs.
District Judge Agra
Decided on: Dec 02, 1999
Consistency in pleadings and the requirement for timely and justified amendments to written statements.
Headnote:
Amendment - Written Statement - The court rejected the petitioner's application for amendment of the written statement, which contained inconsistent averments regarding the rent and consideration for the shop in question.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment, and damages against the petitioner, who had filed a written statement with inconsistent averments regarding the rent and consideration for the shop.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the rejection of the amendment application by the Trial Court and directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the suit within three months.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the petitioner's application for amendment of the written statement, which contained inconsistent averments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of consistency in pleadings and the need for timely and justified amendments to written statements.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the respondent No. 2 was directed to decide the suit within three months.
Sudhir Narain, J.
This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27-7-1999 passed by the Judge Small Causes Court rejecting the amendment application filed by the petitioner and the order of the Revisional Court dated 8-10-1999 affirming the said order in revision.
2. THE plaintiff-respondent filed suit for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages against the petitioner on the ground that he committed default in payment of arrears of rent and was liable for eviction. THE petitioner filed written statement. In the written statement it was stated that he is a tenant of Rs. 20/- per month and not Rs. 150/- per month as claimed by the plaintiff. In Paragraph 9 of the written statement it was slated that the plaintiff and his father Sri B. D. Gupta had started to demand Rs. 35,000/- as Pagree of the shop and on refusal by the defendant they have started threatening him to dispossess forcibly and get the shop vacated from him.
After 12 years of filing the written statement the petitioner filed an application for amendment of his written statement on 19-3-1999 alleging that the plain tiffs had let out the shop in question on a monthly rent of Rs. 20/- on receiving consideration of Rs. 36,000/- from him. This averment was inconsistent from the averment made in the original written statement wherein it was stated that Rs. 35,000/- was demanded from the defendant and that was refused.
3. THE Trial Court rightly rejected the amendment application. THE suit was filed on 1987 and is pending. Respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the suit within three months. THE Registry shall send a copy of this order to respondent No. 2. THE writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
