Vikram Nath, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and have also perused the pleadings on record.
(2.) This writ petition is directed against the order dated 24.1.2006 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation whereby he has partly allowed the revision filed by the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 only to the extent, it rejected the amendment application of the petitioner filed before the Settlement Officer Consolidation and allowed by the said Court. In so far as, the order of the Settlement Officer Consolidation with regard to condonation of delay in filing the appeal is concerned the same has been maintained by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.
(3.) Reasons stated in the order of Deputy Director of Consolidation for rejecting the amendment application is two fold, firstly it required fresh evidence to be led by the petitioner/parties and secondly that the case set up by the petitioner in the amendment application totally changed the nature of the defence/claim of the petitioner.;