Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

1. Heard Sri Pankaj Misra, learned counsel for the defendant-revisionist/ petitioner and Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondents.

2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying to set aside the order dated 21.12.2017 in S.C.C. Revision No.1 of 2017 (Dharmendra Kumar Sharma v. Somendra Babu and others) passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge/FTC Court No.2, Kasganj, whereby the amendment application of the defendant-revisionist/petitioner to amend his written statement by adding few lines in paragraph-7 of the written statement has been rejected.

3. Aggrieved with the impugned order dated 21.12.2017 rejecting the aforesaid amendment application, the defendant-revisionist/petitioner has filed the present petition.

Facts :

4. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that shop No. 636, Ward No.1, Nadrai Gate, district Kasganj, was owned by one Sri Jagmohan Lal, son of Sri Kedari Lal. During his life time he admitted that one Sri Ram Swaroop Sharma, son of Sri Jhandu Lal was a tenant in the aforesaid shop. Sri Ram Swaroop Sharma died issue-less in September 1983. He had only one real sister namely, Smt. Triveni Devi. The aforesaid owner Sri Jagmohan Lal executed a will dated 21.10.1982 in favour of the plaintiff-respondent nos. 1 and 2. He died on 20.10.1982. Thus, the plaintiff-respondent became the owner and landlord of the disputed shop. They filed S.C.C. Suit No.34 of 1986 (Somendra Babu and Upendra Kumar, Smt. Triveni Devi and Dharmendra Kumar ), praying for ejectment of the tenant/ defendant no.1 on the ground of subletting to the defendant no.2/petitioner herein. During pendency of the aforesaid S.C.C. Suit, the plaintiff-respondent no.1 Sri Somendra Babu died, who was succeeded by heirs and legal representatives being plaintiff-respondent nos. 1/1 to 1/6. The defendant no.1 Smt.Triveni Devi also died during pendency of the aforesaid S.C.C. Suit. She was succeeded by her heirs and legal representatives i.e. defendant no.1/1 to 1/5.

5. A written statement was filed by the defendant no.2/petitioner herein on 29.10.1987 in which he took the stand that he succeeded his tenancy after the death of the original tenant Sri Ram Swaroop Sharma on account of his will. He also took the stand that during the life time of Sri Ram Swaroop Sharma, who was looking after the business and was also a co-tenant. When the aforesaid S.C.C suit was at the final stage of disposal, the defendant no.2/petitioner herein filed an alleged paper no. (211C) dated 5.2.1975. By this evidence the defendant-no.2/petitioner herein attempted to establish that the original tenant late Sri Jagmohan Lal had admitted him as co-tenant along with the original tenant late Sri Ram Swaroop Sharma.

6. The aforesaid suit was decreed by a judgment dated 31.3.2016 passed by the Judge Small Cause Court /Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kasganj.

7. On the issue of tenancy or subletting to the defendant no.2/petitioner, the Judge Small Cause Court recorded a finding that the shop in question was sublet. He disbelieved the evidence/permission deed dated 5.2.1975 (paper No.211C). He also observed that even there was no pleading in the written statement which may support the evidence 211C rather the pleading made by the defendant no.2/petitioner was by way of will the original tenant Ram Swaroop Sharma succeeded the tenancy and that rent was being paid by him since the life time of late Ram Swaroop Sharma, which were being recorded in the books of accounts and was engaged by Sri Jagmohan Lal as the original landlord. However, no evidence including the alleged books of accounts were filed by the defendant no.2/petitioner herein.

8. During pendency of the aforesaid S.C.C. Suit, the defendant no.2/petitioner had filed a petition being matters under Article 227 No.1267 of 2016 (Dharmendra Kumar Sharma v. Somendra Babu and 6 others) to challenge the order dated 21.