1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7370/2009. Shri Chand Goyal & Anr. VS ACJ (JD) No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur & Anr. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7370/2009. Shri Chand Goyal and Another. VERSUS Addl.Civil Judge (JD) No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur & Anr. 01.07.2009. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Mr.Brijesh Yadav, for the petitioners. Mr.A.K.Chaudhary ] Mr.Ajay Sharma ] for the respondents. ***** Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 25.05.2009 by which the application submitted under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. for amendment of the written statement filed by the defendant-petitioner-tenant has been rejected. By the aforesaid application, the defendant- petitioner wanted to bring on record the fact in the written statement with regard to the purchase of a house bearing No.5/704 by the plaintiff by means of two sale-deeds Exhibits A-4 and A-5 which were produced by DW-1 and DW-2 in the evidence. The submission of the learned counsel for the defendant-petitioner is that on account of the fact that there being no pleadings to this effect, it was apprehended that the learned trial court at any 2 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7370/2009. Shri Chand Goyal & Anr. VS ACJ (JD) No.2, Jaipur City, Jaipur & Anr. subsequent stage may ignore this piece of evidence on account of there being no pleadings to this effect and hence, the written statement was sought to be amended. Learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent- landlord, on the other hand has drawn the attention of this court to that part of the order where the learned trial court has considered the facts on record and has held that the fact regarding purchase of the property by the plaintiff by the documents in question has already been taken on record and the defendant appearing as DW-1 and his witness DW-2 in their affidavits filed before the court have already deposed to that effect and the sale-deeds have already been exhibited as Exhibits A-4 and A-5 and the plaintiff has not objected to the same. He further submits that so far as the purchase of the property by the documents Exhibits A-4 and A-5 is concerned, that is not disputed by the plaintiff and, therefore, there is no necessity whatsoever for incorporating the aforesaid fact in the written statement by the defendant. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.