C) No. 5170 of 2011 · Jharkhand High Court

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. … … For the Petitioner For the Respondents : - M/s. Anil Choudhary and Birendra Kr., Advocates., : - M/s. R. R. Sinha and Kumar Amit, Advocates. … 05/10.10.2012 The petitioner by way of the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ/order/direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated

25.07.2011 (Annexure-6) passed in Eviction Suit No. 2 of 2010 by the learned court of Munsif, Koderma, whereby the amendment petition dated

01.07.2011 filed on behalf of the plaintiffs was allowed.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the Respondents.

Perused the impugned order as well as other documents annexed to the petition.

On perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned court below has passed a detailed order justifying the need of amendment and has also given reasons for allowing the same in accordance with the provisions contained in Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Thus, it appears that the court below has not committed any error while passing the said order. The argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted in view of the reasons recorded by the court below. Therefore, intervention of this Court is not called for in the matter. The learned counsel for the petitioner lastly submitted that the petitioner-defendant may be permitted to file additional written statement.

It appears that the learned court below has observed in its order that the defendant will be at liberty to file additional written statement, therefore, the defendant shall file the additional written statement, if required in the matter.