ALOK SHARMA,J - (1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India a challenge has been laid to the order dated 27.11.2010 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division) No.2, Dholpur, dismissing the petitioner tenant's application under Order 6 Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code for amendment of his written statement.
(2.) Facts of the case are that a suit for eviction was filed by the plaintiff respondent (hereinafter, the respondent) in the year 1991 against the petitioner tenant (hereinafter "the tenant") and his mother and others. The said suit is being duly contested by the mother of the tenant and others and written statements have been filed therein. At the time of filing of the suit for eviction, as the petitioner tenant was a minor, one Shri T.K.Modi, an Advocate of repute came to be appointed as his guardian ad litem and a written statement came to be filed on behalf of the tenant as defendant in suit on or about 30th September, 1983.
(3.) In the aforesaid suit, issues have already been settled as early as 8th July, 2003 and the evidence of one of the landlords Shri Purushottam Das taken by way of an affidavit in evidence and he cross examined on 17th July, 2010. It appears that there-upon the petitioner tenant proceeded on a strategy of obfuscation and obstruction and commenced moving various applications before the trial Court even though the evidence of the plaintiff was under way. In the first instance an application came to be moved on or about 28th September, 2010 purported to be one under Section 151 Civil Procedure Code seeking filing of a fresh written statement. The said application was dismissed by the trial Court on 20th October, 2010. Immediately thereafter, on 21st October, 2010 another application was moved by the petitioner tenant for stay in the proceedings of the suit. The said application was also dismissed. Thereafter on 29.10.2010 an application was further moved by the petitioner tenant seeking to amend the written statement filed as early as 8th July, 2003.;