Ritu Raj Awasthi, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr. Surya Prakash Singh, learned Counsel appearing for opposite parties No. 2 and 3.
(2.) THE writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 10.4.2009 passed by the Appellate Court in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2000, whereby the application paper No. 195 - A/2 for amendment in the written statement has been allowed with cost. The additional evidence filed by paper No. 198 - C/1 is admitted on record as additional evidence. Application paper No. 197 - C/2, was allowed with cost. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners submitted that with respect to five plots in question a suit for specific performance was filed, which was decreed in favour of the Petitioners by judgment and order dated 18.12.1999. Against the said judgment, the aforesaid appeal was preferred by the opposite parties. During the pendency of the said appeal when the case was fixed for judgment, the opposite parties have preferred an application for amendment in the written statement along with an application for adducing additional evidence.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioners contends that the said application was liable to be rejected as it intend to change the nature of the controversy involved and also on the ground of being moved with undue delay at the stage when the case was fixed for judgment.;