VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents-caveator and perused the record.
(2.) Present petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 22.3.2018 passed by the District Judge, Hathras in Civil Revision (Misc.) No. 89 of 2018 (Shanti Swaroop v. State and others) as well as order dated 24.2.2018 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Hathras in Original Suit No. 465 of 2990 (Shanti Swarup v. State of UP and others). A further prayer has been made to direct the revisional Court to re-decide the amendment application of petitioner bearing paper no. 9A afresh.
(3.) By the impugned order dated 24.2.2018, the application filed by the defendant no. 3 being paper no. 157A seeking amendment in the written statement by adding a legal plea has been allowed. Revision filed against the same was rejected. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the suit is of the year 1990 and is at the stage of final hearing. Submission, therefore, is that in view of proviso to Rule 17 of Order 6 CPC, such amendment after commencement of trial and that too at the final stage cannot be allowed. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on a judgement of this Court rendered in Matter under Article 227 No. 1482 of 2018 (Ramashanker @ Shahu and another v. Jamuna and 3 others) decided on 13.3.2018.;