IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-7829-2025(O&M)

Date of decision: 13.11.2025 Jagjit Singh & Others ...Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Gurcharan Singh ...Respondent(s)

***

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. S.S. Rangi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raman Preet Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present Revision Petition has been filed by the defendants under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking setting aside of order dated 02.09.2025 (Annexure P7) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Samana, whereby application filed by the petitioners under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC for amendment of written statement, has been dismissed.

2. It is inter alia submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the amendment sought by the petitioners was innocuous in nature. No prejudice whatsoever will be caused to the respondent/plaintiff in case the said amendment is allowed. It is submitted that despite due diligence, the petitioners could not mention the proposed amendments in the written statement filed by them. The said amendments are very necessary for the proper adjudication of the case. It is accordingly prayed that the impugned order be set aside. In support of his contentions, learned counsel relies upon judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Revajeetu Builders & Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons, (SC) : Law Finder Doc ID # 205047.

3. No other argument is made on behalf of the petitioners.

4. I have heard learned counsel and perused the case file in detail.

I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioners.

5. Admittedly, the Civil Suit (Annexure P1) for declaration and permanent injunction in the present case was filed by the respondent/plaintiff in the year 2017; to which the petitioners had filed written statement (Annexure P2) only six years thereafter on 31.05.2023. The petitioners had then filed written statement to Amended Plaint dated 06.05.2024 (Annexure P4). Now, petitioners have moved the instant application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the written statement on 22.01.2025 (Annexure P5), which has been dismissed vide impugned order.

6. Perusal of the said application (Annexure P5) shows that petitioners wish to incorporate the facts that defendant No.2 had sold 6 marla property in favour of one Paramjit Wadhwa vide Sale Deed dated 18.11.2016; who had further sold part of the said property to Smt. Gurdeep Kaur vide registered Sale Deed dated 03.03.2017. It is further stated in the said application that “…and the mutation of the same was entered and sanctioned in favour of Smt. Gurdeep Kaur and Gurdeep Kaur being purchaser become owner in possession of the property covered under the sale deed mentioned above. Thereafter, Smt. Gurdeep Kaur constructed the Kothi in the property purchased by her, but at the time of filing the written statement, defendants inadvertently did not disclose all these above facts to their counsel and due to that reason above said material facts not mentioned in the written statement and the defendant wants to add the above facts at the end of para no.8 of the written statement on merits by way of amendment…”

(Emphasis added)

7. Order 6 Rule 17 CPC reads as follows:-

“17. Amendment of pleadings. -The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties:

Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.”

8. A bare reading of the above provision shows that no doubt, amendment is to be permitted in justiciable terms for the determination of the real controversy at hand. Howev