SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J. - (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the revisionists-defendant nos.1, 2 and 3 and Sri Pankaj Agarwal and Sri Govind Krishna, learned counsel for the opposite party no.1/plaintiff.
(2.) This revision under Section 115 C.P.C. has been filed by the revisionists-defendant praying to set aside the order dated 1.3.2017 in O.S. No.500 of 2013, passed by the Court of Civil Judge (S.D.), Aligarh, whereby the Amendment Application 50-C has been rejected on the ground that the amendment amounts to withdrawing the admission made by the revisionist-defendant no.1 in his written statement in O.S. no.1390 of 2011 (Dr. Ashutosh Misra and another v. Dr. Krishna Dutta Mishra).
(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionists-defendant submits that the amendment is clarificatory in nature and, therefore, the Court below has committed manifest error of law in rejecting the amendment application. He relied upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ram Niranjan Kajaria v. Sheo Prakash Kajaria and others 2015(10) SCC 203 (para 22 and 27) and Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy and Sons and others, 2009(3) ARC 502 S.C. (para 58 to 65).;