Civil Revision No. 5655 of 2011 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 5655 of 2011 Date of decision. 16.09.2011 Jangir Singh .... Petitioner Versus Daljit Singh ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present: Mr.Sandeep Jasuja Advocate for the petitioner. **** Vijender Singh Malik, J. This is a revision petition brought by Jangir Singh, defendant against the order dated 10.08.2011 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalalabad (West), vide which the application of the defendant-petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the written statement, has been dismissed. Daljit Singh, defendant claiming himself to be the sole proprietor of M/s Balwant Singh & Sons, Commission Agents, Jalalabad (West) had filed a suit for recovery of Rs.3,58,610.64 paise on the basis of entries in his account books, claimed to be maintained in the ordinary course of business and other evidence. The defendant-petitioner Jangir Singh filed written statement thereto (Annexure P-1), which has the printed date as 15.12.2005 . He had filed the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure Civil Revision No. 5655 of 2011 --2-- seeking to add two preliminary objections whereby he wanted to claim that Balwant Singh is the sole proprietor of M/S Balwant Singh and Sons and that he was representing himself to be the sole proprietor of the said concern and he himself was dealing with the defendant on behalf of the concern. It is also sought to be added by way of preliminary objections in the written statement that the defendant had paid the outstanding dues to Balwant Singh on 30.08.2005 after selling the combine Swaraj 8100 and that Balwant Singh had duly issued a katchi receipt as well as a receipt on 30.08.2005 for that payment. The application was opposed by the plaintiff.Hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalalabad (West) dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Jangir Singh, petitioner has brought this revision petition. I have heard Mr. Sandeep Jasuja, Advocate for the revision- petitioner and have gone through the record carefully. Learned counsel for the revision-petitioner has contended that the written statement is sought to be amended by way of addition of two preliminary objections. According to him, the provisions regarding amendment of pleadings are different for amendment of plaint and written statement. According to him, an additional defence can be taken by the defendant. He has submitted that the trial court has wrongly dismissed the application. Civil Revision No. 5655 of 2011 --3-- There can be no dispute about the proposition that a defendant can be allowed to take additional defence to the claim of the plaintiff made against him. The said plea may even be at conflict with the plea taken in the original written statement. However, the defendant cannot be permitted to displace the plaintiff from the position he has acquired on the existing pleadings of the defendant. A perusal of the written statement filed by the petitioner to the claim of the plaintiff nowhere lays any hint to the effect that Daljit Singh is not the proprietor of Balwant Singh and Sons, Commission Agents, Jalalabad (West) . The averments of the plaintiff in this regard are not disputed in the written statement. The petitioner has, moreover, claimed that he had been dealing with Daljit Singh. It is specifically mentioned in the written statement that the plaintiff appears to have taken undue advantage of the illiteracy of the defendant, on account of which, the accounts have been manipulated. It is also mentioned that the father of Daljit Singh had also filed a civil suit for specific performance on the basis of alleged agreement dated 14.5.2004. , which is pending adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is illiterate and the firm had been advancing amount of Rs.1000/- but making it into Rs.1,00,000/- by adding two zeros thereto. He has submitted that they have tried to take undue benefit of the illiteracy of the petitioner. Civil Revision No. 5655 of 2011 --4-- In my opinion, illiteracy of the petitioner is not a relevant fact before me. The defendant-petitioner wants to completely displace the plaintiff by taking the plea that Balwant Singh is the sole proprietor of M/s Balwant Singh & Sons, Commission Agents, Jalalabad (West). If this plea is allowed to be taken, the suit brought by Daljit Singh is thrown out of the court. The facts that Balwant Singh is the sole proprietor of M/s Balwant Singh & Sons, that he was representing himself to be the sole proprietor of the firm and that the defendant was dealing with him as also that the amount due to the firm has been paid by the defendant to Balwant Singh, who had issued receipt dated 30.08.2005 are such facts which could not be forgotten at the time of filing of written statement. The written statement on the record has 15.12.2005 as the date. Therefore, it was filed after the execution of the alleged receipt by Balwant Singh. No sufficient time had elapsed after the execution of the receipt till the filing of the written statement, which could have brought forgetfulness to the defendant- petitioner regarding this fact. It is evident from the record that the case is pending for evidence of the defendant-petitioner. After availing 3 or 4 opportunities, he was granted last opportunity and facing the last opportunity and apprehension of closure of his evidence, he has sought this amendment, which is not bonafide. Learned trial court, therefore, does not appear to have committed any illegality in dismissing the application of the petitioner- Civil Revision No. 5655 of 2011 --5-- defendant under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petition is, therefore, devoid of merit and is dismissed. (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 16.09.2011 dinesh