MOHD NADEEM Vs. HABIB AHMED
LAWS(ALL)-2005-3-78
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on March 09,2005

MOHD NADEEM Appellant
VERSUS
HABIB AHMED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) VIKRAM Nath, J. This writ petition has been filed by the defendant challenging the order dated 6-2-2004 passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court and also order dated 30-7-2004 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 6, Bareilly, whereby the amendment application filed by the defendant-petitioner was dismissed and the revision against the same was also dismissed.
(2.) THE facts giving rise to this petition are that Habib Ahmad respondent filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment of the petitioner, which was registered as S. C. C. Suit No. 57 of 2000 Habib Ahmad v. Mohd. Nadeem. THE defendant-petitioner filed written statement and subsequently moved and amendment application (paper No. 48-C) seeking amendment of the written statement. Objections were filed by the plaintiff to the said application, mainly on two grounds firstly, that in the garb of the amendment sought by the defendant he wanted to withdraw an admission made in the written statement and secondly, the amendment was filed at a belated stage after close of plaintiff's evidence. THE trial Court vide order dated 6-2- 2004 after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the amendment sought by the petitioner was not at all necessary and accordingly rejected the same. Aggrieved by the said order the defendant-petitioner filed a revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, which was registered as S. C. C. Revision No. 14 of 2004. The revisional Court also by means of judgment dated 30-7-2004 dismissed the revision. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.
(3.) I have heard Sri Dilip Khare, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Javed Habib, learned Counsel for the respondent. Learned Counsel for the respondent has made a statement that he does not propose to file counter- affidavit and prays that the petition itself may be finally decided. The Counsel for petitioner has no objection. With the consent of the parties the petition itself is being finally heard at the stage of admission.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.