Civil Revision No. 3829 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 3829 of 2009 Date of decision: 16.11.2009 Gurmit Singh ......petitioner Versus Rajinder Kumar and another .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Sherry K.Singla, Advocate. for the petitioner. Mr.Binderjit Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.1. **** SABINA, J. Plaintiff Rajinder Kumar filed a suit for declaration and specific performance of agreement to sell dated 20.6.205 and for cancellation of mortgage deed dated 6.7.2005. In the written statement, petitioner-defendant No.1 took up the stand that the agreement to sell had never been executed by him and the same was a result of fraud and was a fabricated document. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner moved an application for Civil Revision No. 3829 of 2009 2 permission to amend the written statement and explain the plea of fraud taken by him in the written statement. Vide impugned order dated 22.5.2009, the said application was dismissed. Hence, the present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by defendant No.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by way of amendment, the petitioner only wants to explain the plea taken by him in the written statement that the agreement to sell in question was a result of fraud and was a fabricated document. Reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in Taran Singh v. Banarsi Lal 2005 (2) RCR (Civil) 251. Learned counsel for respondent No.1, on the other hand, has submitted that the application had been rightly dismissed by the trial Court as the same had been filed at a belated stage. The plaintiff had already concluded his evidence and now the case was listed for evidence of the petitioner-defendant. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that this petition deserves to be allowed. By way of amendment in the written statement, the petitioner wants to explain his plea that the agreement to sell in question was a result of fraud and was a fabricated document. Although the case is now listed for defendants' evidence yet in the interest of justice, the application for permission to amend the written statement is liable to be allowed as by way of amendment the Civil Revision No. 3829 of 2009 3 petitioner only wants to explain the plea already taken by him. Moreover, in case the petitioner is allowed to amend the written statement, the lis between the parties will be disposed of more effectively and on merits and the other side can be compensated with costs. Hence, the reasons given by the trial Court in declining the application filed by the petitioner to amend the written statement cannot be sustained. The impugned order dated 22.5.2009 is set aside. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to amend the written statement subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs. Thereafter, the trial Court shall proceed with the case further in accordance with law. It is needless to say that the plaintiff- respondent No.1 would be at liberty to rebut the evidence led by the petitioner after amendment of the written statement. (SABINA) JUDGE November 16, 2009 anita