Shashi Kant Agarwal, J. - (1.) This a defendant's application in revision against the order of the learned Munsif of Roorkee, rejecting his application for amendment of the written statement. The relevant facts are as follows: - - On March 28, 1967, the plaintiff -opposite party filed a suit for the applicant's ejectment. April 16, 1968 was fixed for final hearing. A day earlier, i.e., April 15, 1968, Dip Chand, applicant's wife's brother, filed an application praying that he be impleaded as a defendant as he was a cotenant. This application was dismissed by the learned Munsif. On April 16, 1968, the applicant filed an application for the amendment of the plaint on the ground that the suit was not maintainable as Dip Chand was a cotenant and no notice u/S. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act had been served upon him. This application was dismissed on the same day and the suit was decreed u/O. XVII, R. 3 of the CPC.
(2.) The applicant filed an appeal which was allowed and the case was remanded. In the order of remand, however, the lower appellate court recorded a finding to the effect that the application for amendment of the written statement had been rightly rejected. No appeal was filed against the remand order containing this finding which was damaging to the applicant's case.
(3.) When the case was received back by the learned Munsif on remand, the applicant filed another application for amendment of the written statement on the same grounds upon which his earlier application for amendment had been based. This application has been rejected by the learned Munsif by the order sought to be revised.;