CR 3495 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CR 3495 of 2011 Date of decision:30.5.2011 Malhotra Land Developer and Colonisers Pvt. ltd petitioner vs Smt. Sharanjit Kaur respondent Present:- Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr.Advocate with Ms. Sukhwinder Kaur, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI Through the instant revision petition, order dated 4.2.2011 passed by the trial court permitting the amendment of the written statement has been challenged. Vide impugned order the trial court has permitted the defendant-respondent to incorporate preliminary objection No. 5, 6,7 and 8 inter alia on the ground that the amendment has been permitted at the initial stage and that the defendant- respondent wants to elaborate the fraud allegedly committed by the plaintiff- petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted that the trial court has permitted incorporation of few lines in objection No.4 and to add preliminary objections 5,6,7 and 8. Learned counsel has read out the preliminary objections 5,6,7 and 8, which have been permitted to be incorporated in the name of amendment. Learned counsel submits that prima facie reading of preliminary objections, which have been permitted to be added shows that these are absolutely unnecessary scandalous, CR 3495 of 2011 2 frivolous and vexatious and would rather prejudice the fair trial of the suit and would delay the fair trial. He has argued that the additional pleas taken are nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. After considering the arguments of counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that in case the plaintiff- petitioner is aggrieved by some unnecessary frivolous or vexatious pleadings, it is always open to the petitioner to avail the remedy, open to it under Order 6 Rule 16 CPC. Learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to raise all the pleas by moving an appropriate application in accordance with law, if permitted. Ordered accordingly. May 30 , 2011 (M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE