Aggrieved by order dated 03.03.2015 in T.S No. 150 of 1998, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. T. S No. 150 of 1998 was filed for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The petitioners are defendants in the suit. A common written statement was filed on behalf of the defendants on 04.02.1999 After the parties closed their evidence and the case was fixed for hearing, application dated 31.08.2012 under Order VI Rule 17 C.P.C was filed for amending the written statement.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, the amendments sought to be incorporated in the written statement are formal in nature and if the petitioners/defendants are permitted to amend the written statement it would not cause prejudice to the plaintiffs. Referring to the proposed amendment in paragraph no. 26 of the written statement, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, judgment in Title Appeal No. 19 of 1984 and Second Appeal No. 132 (R) of 1986 are matters of record and the proposed amendments are intended to make the averments in the written statement more specific and therefore, application dated 31.08.2012 could not have been dismissed by the trial court.
4. A perusal of impugned order dated 03.03.2015 indicates that the defendants preferred another application for amendment which was dismissed on 13.08.2012 The Title Suit is pending final hearing since 2006. In so far as giving details with respect to judgment in Title Appeal No. 19 of 1984 and Second Appeal No. 132 (R) of 1986 are concerned, after the defendants closed their evidence, no purpose would be served by amending the written statement. The judgments in the aforesaid cases and the amendment in the constitution of the Church are questions of fact which, if already not brought on record by the defendants through oral and/or documentary evidence, after the parties closed their evidence, by amending the written statement the defendants cannot be permitted to bring those facts on record. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.