Soumen Sen, J. - (1.) The order rejecting an application under Order 6, Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure is the subject matter of challenge in this revisional application. The reason for rejecting the application, in short, was that the plaintiffs applied for amendment after commencement of trial and at the stage of argument. The defendants concluded their argument and the plaintiffs were also about to conclude their argument. The plaintiffs became aware of the actual measurement of the suit scheduled property after the written statement was filed and even at the stage of cross-examination of D.W.1 but did not exercise due diligence to amend the measurement of the suit schedule and the petition was filed at a much belated stage.
(2.) The plaintiffs in the suit prayed for declaration that the plaintiff no. 1 is still continuing as a monthly tenant in respect of an area of 4415 Sq. Ft. at the 1st floor of Premises no. 1A, Janki Shah Road, P.S. Hastings, Calcutta-22 along with other reliefs in the nature of permanent and mandatory injunction.
(3.) The plaintiff no. 1 in the suit claims to be tenant under the defendant nos. 2 to 7. It was alleged that on the basis of some amicable arrangement the plaintiff no. 1 agreed to surrender the said tenanted partition on an express understanding that the plaintiffs would be accommodated in the newly constructed building with more or less the same area which they were in occupation prior to vacating the said premises.;