IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.2888 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 19.05.2008 Jaiwant Singh Parmar ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Anuj Raura, Advocate vs. Smt.Parveen & others ....Respondent(s) through None. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 21.4.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr.Division), Panchkula whereby an application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the written statement and to incorporate para 5-A therein has been dismissed. By way of the proposed amendment, the petitioner-defendant wants to refer to the details of various documents allegedly executed between him and the deceased husband of respondent-plaintiff No.1 and father of respondent-plaintiff Nos.2 and 3. Relying upon those documents, the petitioner-defendant wants to prove that the judgment and decree dated 8.6.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Panchkula which has been challenged by the respondent-plaintiffs, was validly passed. I have seen the unamended written statement filed by the petitioner-defendant. The necessary pleadings appear to have already been C.R. No.2888 of 2008 -2- made by him in the written statement which may be proved by leading the evidence, if so advised. No case to seek amendment of the written statement to incorporate the details of the documents is made out. Dismissed. May 19, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE