$~71

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 12.12.2025

+ CM(M) 2416/2025, CM APPL. 78531/2025 & CM APPL.

78530/2025

OM PRAKASH .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Pankaj Vivek, Advocate.

versus

BRAHM SINGH .....Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

1. Petitioner/defendant has assailed order dated 19.11.2025 of the learned trial court, whereby his application for amendment of Written Statement was dismissed. Having heard learned counsel for

petitioner/defendant, I do not find it a fit case to even issue notice.

2. Broadly speaking, after closure of plaintiff’s evidence (in which as many as six witnesses were examined), at the stage of recording the defendant’s evidence, the petitioner/defendant filed an application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC seeking to amend the Written Statement in order to incorporate reference to two writ petitions, filed before this Court. The petitioner/defendant in his application took a stand that since the said two writ petitions were filed subsequent to filing of the Written Statement, he

D By ig :N ita E ll E y T S U ig N ne N d AIR G KA IR T I H SH P ALIA DD2aCps9cD e n f. 6 oO iN a 53 r g =b s t i . U9 :4 a i e