Smt. Poonam Saxena vs Shambhu Dayal
2012 Latest Caselaw 1056 ALL

Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 1056 ALL
Judgement Date : 30 April, 2012

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Poonam Saxena vs Shambhu Dayal on 30 April, 2012

Bench: Prakash Krishna




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 4
 

 
Case :- CIVIL REVISION No. - 197 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Poonam Saxena
 
Respondent :- Shambhu Dayal
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Siddhartha Varma
 

 
Hon'ble Prakash Krishna,J.

Heard Sri Siddhartha Varma, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Rama Goel "Bansal", who has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party.

By the order under revision, the court below has rejected the amendment application to amend the written statement. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the amendment sought for in the written statement is formal in nature.

Refuting the above, learned counsel for the opposite party submits that the amendment application is wholly malafide. It has been filed just to delay the disposal of the suit. She also pointed out that the suit has to be decided within the time frame fixed by the High Court in the earlier proceedings between the parties. To get over the said time frame, an amendment application has been filed. Elaborating the argument, she further submits that the amendment application is not maintainable as the evidence of the plaintiff has already been recorded.

Considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

A bare perusal of the order under revision would show that the court below has permitted to raise the legal pleas.

Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the amendment application does not appear to be bonafide one and was filed just to delay the disposal of the suit. No good ground for interference at this stage has been made out.

The revision is dismissed, summarily.

It is provided that the trial court shall adhere to the time frame fixed by the High Court in deciding the suit. However, it shall be open to the applicant to challenge the impugned order at the time of filing of the revision, if ultimately the suit is decided against him.

(Prakash Krishna,J)

Order Date :- 30.4.2012

MK/