IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No. 1551 of 2005 DEV NANDAN SHARMA Versus SHYAM KISHORE PRASAD @ SAWAN PD. ----------- 13 22.7.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. Grievance of the petitioner against the impugned order dated 9.6.2005 refusing amendment in the written statement, in fact, has been taken note of by the court below in the impugned order, wherein it has been clearly stated that after closure of the evidence of the plaintiff and during the period the defendants themselves had to lead evidence, such amendment petition was filed with a view to delay disposal of the suit. The trial court, in fact, has also gone to hold that whatever has been sought to be stated in the written statement was not only well within the knowledge of the defendants but also in a way was already stated in the original written statement itself. The delay and the irrelevance therefore has been the primary concern and has weighed upon the court below in refusing such amendment in written statement. In the opinion of this court, such approach of the court below cannot be faulted in 2 law. The whole game of filing this civil revision application was also to only delay disposal of the suit which is of the year 1997. Accordingly, there is no merit in this application and the same is dismissed. Abhay (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)