Sanjeet Kr. Singh v. Shyam Narain Singh And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17005 of 2015 ====================================================== Sanjeet Kr. Singh .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
Shyam Narain Singh & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 21-01-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner is challenging the order dated 30.07.2015 passed by Munsif-II, Hajipur in Title Suit No.16 of 2006 whereby the court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner to file additional written statement.
Perused the order passed by the court below.
It appears that earlier the amendment application was filed by the petitioner to amend the written statement. The trial court allowed the said amendment. The plaintiff challenged the order of the trial court allowing the amendment on the ground that the petitioner now is trying to resile from the admission made in the written statement. Notices were issued and thereafter after hearing both the parties this Court on 17.01.2014 in C.W.J.C. No.12682 of 2011 set aside the order passed by the court below allowing the amendment in the written statement. Thereafter the
Patna High Court CWJC No.17005 of 2015 (2) dt.21-01-2016 petitioner has filed the application seeking permission to file additional written statement. From perusal of the order, it appears that the court below considering these facts has rejected the prayer and refused to permit the petitioner to file additional written statement. In view of the above since the amendment which was sought for had already been rejected by the High Court again now for raising that question, the petitioner cannot be allowed to file additional written statement. Thus, the court below has rightly passed the impugned order. In such view of the matter it needs no interference in supervisory jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the writ application is dismissed. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) Harish/- U