AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 133 wordsM.Y. Eqbal, J.—Heard the parties.
The petitioner confines this writ application only against the order dated 22.8.2005, passed by the 1st Sub-ordinate Judge, Godda, in Title Suit No. 37 of 1985, whereby he has allowed the amendment in the written statement sought for by the defendant Nos. 2 to 12.
After considering the nature of the amendments sought for by the defendants, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. This writ application is, accordingly dismissed.
However, when the amendment of the pleadings as has been, allowed, the Court below ought to have given liberty to the petitioner to controvert the amended pleadings. In the circumstance without interfering with the impugned order, the petitioner shall have the liberty to file an affidavit in rebuttal of the amended pleadings.