POONAM SRIVASTAV,J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for petitioner.
(2.) GRIEVANCE of petitioner is that an amendment application dated 25.3.2008 vide paper No. 73-Ka under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. in S.C.C. Suit No. 12 of 2004 instituted at the instance of landlord, has been rejected by Additional District Judge, court No. 2, Varanasi vide order dated 9.7.2009. Additional written statement sought to be brought on record is annexed as annexure No. 2 to the writ petition. It appears that amendment sought is in respect of certain documents, rent receipts, challan etc. which are already on record. Therefore, submission of counsel for petitioner is that no additional evidence will be required in respect of amendment, which has been refused by the court below.
(3.) I have perused the impugned order. While rejecting amendment application, main consideration weighing in the mind of Additional District Judge was that whatever tenant wants to bring by means of additional written statement, has already said in written statement itself, therefore, it does not require any amendment.;