B.K.NAYAK, J. W.P.(C ) NO.10154 OF 2011 (Decided on 26.7.2011) KUMAR CHANDRA MISHRA & ORS. ………Petitioners. .Vrs. RAJKISHORE MOHANTY & ORS. …… .Opp.Parties. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 (ACT NO.5 OF 1908) – ORDER 6, RULE 17. For Petitioners -Mr.S.N.Mishra For Opp.Parties -Mr. Amiya Ku.Mishra Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the impugned order. Order dated 8.3.2011 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Division), Kendrapara in T.S No.29 of 2002 rejecting the petition filed by the plaintiffs for amendment of the plaint has been assailed in this writ petition. Plaintiffs valued the suit at Rs. 5,500/-. The defendants though challenged the valuation in their written statement, the plaintiffs did not take early steps for enhancing the valuation by way of amendment. The suit proceeded to trial and at the stage of argument the plaintiffs filed a petition for amendment of the plaint for raising the valuation of the suit in the year 2002. Apart from taking objection to the said amendment the defendants also filed a memo to the effect that they did not want to raise and contest the issue of valuation. Accordingly, the Trial Court vide order dated 10.12.2002 rejected the amendment petition filed by the plaintiffs and also directed for treating the memo filed by the defendants as part of their pleadings. That order has become final. Subsequent thereto the plaintiffs filed an application under Order 23 rule 1, CPC for withdrawal of the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit and the said petition was rejected on 13.11.2003. A revision carried against that order also met with the same fate. The order was also subsequently challenged by the plaintiffs before this Court in WP(C) No. 10156 of 2004. The writ petition was withdrawn on the submission that the plaintiff-petitioners would file amendment petition before the Trial Court. While allowing withdrawal of the writ petition this Court observed that the amendment petition to be filed by the plaintiffs shall be dealt with in accordance with law. Thereafter, the present amendment petition was filed before the Trial Court for enhancing the valuation of the suit from Rs. 5,500/- to Rs. 55,000/- on the assertion that the defendants have challenged the original valuation made in the plaint. The amendment has been refused by the impugned order on the ground that if allowed it would change the nature and character of the suit and that in the meantime after closure of trial the suit is posted for argument. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the defendants-opposite parties in which, inter alia, it is contended that since the time of previous amendment regarding valuation of the suit the defendants have already agreed not to contest the issue of valuation by filing a memo which has been treated as part of their pleadings by the Trial Court and that order has become final. It is, therefore, contended that no prejudice will be caused to the plaintiffs if the amendment of valuation is not allowed. The learned counsel for the plaintiff-petitioners contends that even if the jurisdiction of the Trial Court would be ousted in the event the amendment is allowed, that by itself is not a ground to refuse the amendment in view of the fact that the defendants have challenged the valuation made by the plaintiffs in the plaint and therefore the plaintiffs were compelled to file the petition for amendment of valuation. The learned counsel for the defendant-opposite parties contends that since the defendants have already agreed not to contest the issue of valuation as originally fixed by the plaintiffs, the amendment for enhancement of valuation would not be necessary for deciding the real controversy between the parties. It is also submitted by him that the defendants undertake not to raise the issue of valuation. There is no dispute that merely because by allowing the amendment of valuation the jurisdiction of the Trial Court would be ousted, that by itself is not a ground to refuse the amendment where such amendment is absolutely necessary for deciding the real question in controversy between the parties. In the instant case, in the suit of the year 1993 the plaintiffs had sufficient opportunity to amend the valuation of the suit as soon as they received the copy of written statement of the defendants in which the valuation put forth by the plaintiffs had been challenged. Long after evidence of the suit was closed and the suit was posted for hearing the plaintiffs have sought to amend the valuation by raising it from Rs. 5,500/- to Rs. 55,000/- which would evidently take away the suit out of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Trial Court. However, considering the fact that the defendants have already foregone their right to contest the issue of valuation of the suit and have also undertaken in their counter affidavit not to contest such issue, in my opinion, enhancement of the evaluation of the suit is not at all necessary to decide the real question in controversy between the parties in the suit. The impugned order therefore needs no interference. In the circumstances, there is no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that the issue of valuation of the suit shall not be contested by the parties. In view of dismissal of the writ petition all the misc. cases stand dismissed. Writ petition dismissed. 2