D.B.Dutta, J. - (1.) Heard the submissions of the learned counsels for both the parties and considered the averments made in the application, I am satisfied that sufficient grounds have been made out in the application for condonation of delay in preferring this revisional application. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the application for condonation of delay is allowed. Re: An application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed on 17.9.92. The revisional application is taken up for hearing.
(2.) In this revisional application, the plaintiff of a suit for recovery of certain dues from his employer, has come forward to challenge an order whereby the trial court allowed the defendant/Opposite party to withdraw his admission on the question of entitlement of the petitioner to gratuity as well as medical reimbursement partially to the extent of Rs. 18,750/- Towards gratuity as against Rs. 20,000/- and Rs. 450/- towards medical re-embracement as against Rs. 500/-. The defendant/Opposite party appears to have categorically admitted in his written statement the fact that the plaintiff/petitioner was entitled to gratuity to the extent of Rs. 18,750/ and medical reimbursement to the extent of Rs. 450/-. The defendant/Opposite party did not only make this admission in his written statement but also filed an application under Order 12 rules 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure making the self-same admission even prior to the filing of the written statement and praying for passing of a part decree to the extent admitted under order 12 rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3.) By the proposed amendment of the written statement, the defendant/Opposite party did in effect seek the leave of the court to withdraw the categorical admission made by him in this behalf in the written statement. The reason for such withdrawal, according to the defendant, is the fact that the court lacks jurisdiction to pass a decree in favour of the plaintiff so far as it relates to the amount claimed on account of gratuity.;