HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.4042 of 2009 Dated 24-11-2010 Between: P.Ammaiah. …Petitioner. And: Vijaya Bank, represented by its Chief Manager, Head Office, D.No.41/2, M.G.Road, Banglore and others. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.4042 of 2009 ORDER: Defendant No.1 in O.S.No.262 of 2008 has questioned the impugned order of the trial court declining leave to file additional written statement. The 1st respondent-Bank filed a suit against defendants 1 to 3 based on a loan allegedly obtained by the defendant No.1. The primary allegations in the plaint therefore are against the defendant No.1 with regard to the pronote and the terms and conditions therefor for repayment. Defendant No.1 filed the written statement but had not specifically denied any of the plaint allegations. Realising the same later, defendant No.1 filed an application i.e., I.A.No.162 of 2009 before the court below purporting to be under order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 C.P.C. seeking to file additional written statement. The said application was rejected by court below on the ground that no satisfactory ground is made out by D.1. In this revision learned counsel for the petitioner contends that on account of typing mistake, the specific denial is not mentioned in the written statement. He has produced a copy of additional written statement proposed to be filed and submitted that the 1st defendant merely has denied plaint allegations and putting the 1st respondent-Bank as plaintiff to the strict proof of the plaint allegations. I have considered the said plea in the light of the specific averments of the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the said application before the court below and the counter filed by the 1st respondent-Bank. Though the case was adjourned on several occasions, nobody had appeared. The affidavit filed in support of the application only states that on account of non-typing of a specific denial by typist at the time of filing of the original written statement, specific denials are not found in the said written statement and for that reason, the present application is made. The 1st respondent-Bank however denies the same in the counter by contending that such additional pleading is not permissible under Order 8 Rule 9 C.P.C. and the said additional written statement contains several additional paragraphs namely 8 to 10 which did not find place in the original written statement. A perusal of the additional written statement proposed to be moved itself shows that the plaint allegations were earlier not denied as false and incorrect. So far as defendants 2 and 3 is concerned, their capacity as guarantors is stated as not known to the defendants. In the plaint, defendants 2 and 3 who executed letter of guarantee are stated to be known to the 1st defendant. The acknowledgement of liability as alleged in the plaint is also now denied. In substance therefore, the additional written statement seems to improve the original written statement by specifically denying the plaint allegations which were not so denied in the original written statement. Apart from that under order 8 Rule 9 C.P.C. other than case of counter claim or set-off, the court would not permit filing of additional pleadings except with leave. The grant of leave in this case was denied by the court below as it was not satisfied with the reasons mentioned by the petitioner in the affidavit. I am also unable to see any substance in the reasons mentioned by the petitioner and as such I am unable to accept the contention of the petitioner that the discretion exercised by the court below is vitiated. On any ground even otherwise also whether it is an amendment of written statement or filing of additional written statement, defendant cannot attempt to withdraw admissions or introduce a specific denial when the original pleadings do not contain such denial. Even on that ground, the impugned order is sustainable. I am therefore not inclined to entertain this revision and the same is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. __________________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 24-11-2010 Dvs HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.R.P. No.4042 of 2009 Dated 24-11-2010