High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Raza Hasan v. Shri Zaki Ahmad And Others - WRIT - A No. 63020 of 2006  RD-AH 19624 (20 November 2006)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 63020 of 2006
Sri Zaki Ahmad and others
Hon. Sanjay Misra, J.
Heard Sri Naveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H.C.Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 17.5.2005 passed by the Court of Judge Small Cause,Amroha district J.P.Nagar as also the revisional order dated 16.9.2006 passed by the District Judge, J.P.Nagar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the amendment application (122Ga) made by the petitioner sought two amendments. The first amendment was with respect to typing mistake which had occurred in his written statement and the second amendment related to the inclusion of the fact regarding transfer of property between the parties as also that there was no declaration u/s 147 of U.P.Z.A and L.R.Act with respect to the property in question. He had also sought an amendment that all the landlord/ owners had not signed the notice or the application and therefore, the suit was not maintainable. The aforesaid amendment was considered by the trial court and it allowed the amendment of typing mistakes. However, the trial court found that the other amendments sought appeared to change the nature of the case set up by the petitioner. Consequently it disallowed the application to that extent.
Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed revision.The revisional court did not agree with the finding of the trial court and held that by the amendment nature of the case set up by the petitioner was not being changed . However, it found that the amendments sought were already pleaded in the written statement. Consequently, the court was
of the opinion that since the aforesaid pleadings already existed in the written statement therefore there was no occasion to allow the said amendments and hence the revisional court proceeded to dismiss the revision.
Having perused the impugned order passed by the revisional court as also the amendments sought by the petitioner it appears that the amendments sought having been already pleaded in the written statement, although in different words, did not require to be made. No error can be found in the order passed by the revisional court.
The writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. No order is passed as to costs.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.