IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 3205 of 2011 Date of decision: 13.5.2011 Surjit Singh … Petitioner versus Gurmeet Singh and another … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. P.S.Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner is one of the defendants in the suit for separate possession by way of partition, titled Gurmeet Singh v. Surjit Singh and another. He is aggrieved with order dated 30.3.2011 passed by the Civil Judge(Jr.Division), Jagraon, by dint of which his application for amendment of the written statement has been dismissed. Heard. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the amendment sought is only to rectify the error in the written statement wherein it has been stated that Rs.2 lacs have been spent on the construction of the building in the suit property though it was required to be mentioned as Rs.20 lacs and in fact, due to typographical error, the word '0' (zero) has been omitted. In my view, this seems to be a typographical error which can be cured by way of amendment. Rules and procedure are hand-maid of justice and are meant for enhancing the same and not to scuttle it. The dispute between the parties is required to be disposed of on merits and not on the basis of technicalities. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed and the order under challenge is set aside. The trial Court is directed to permit the petitioner to amend the written statement as prayed. The order passed is, however, subject to payment of costs of Rs.5000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the opposite side before the trial Court. C.R. No. 3205 of 2011 -2- Keeping in view the circumstances mentioned above, this revision is being disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party. If the respondents are summoned to contest this litigation, they will have to incur huge expenses to defend this case. However, liberty is granted to the respondents that if they feel dissatisfied with this order, they may move an application to recall the same. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. May 13, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE