CR No. 3579 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Revision No. 3579 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.5.2011. Bachitar Singh and others .......Petitioners Vs. Devinder Pal Singh and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. ..... SABINA, J. Plaintiffs-petitioners have filed a suit for declaration. The defendants filed their written statement cum counter claim. During the pendency of the suit, an application was moved by the defendants for permission to amend the written statement cum counter claim. Vide the impugned order dated 28.3.2011, the trial court allowed the said application filed by the defendants. Hence, the present petition by the plaintiffs. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case is now listed before the trial court for defendants evidence. Defendants have examined 4-5 witnesses and have moved an application for permission to amend the written statement cum counter claim to delay the proceedings. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. Earlier the defendants had filed their written statement cum counter claim but have sought amendment in their pleadings CR No. 3579 of 2011 (O&M) -2- vide application Annexure P-4. By way of amendment, the defendants want to incorporate the mortgage amount i.e. ` 100/- in their pleadings. The case of the defendants is that due to inadvertence they could not plead the mortgage amount in the written statement cum counter claim. Admittedly, the suit land had been mortgaged by the predecessors in interest of the defendants with the predecessors in interest of the plaintiffs. Since the factum of mortgage is not in dispute, the learned trial court rightly allowed the application for amendment of the written statement cum counter claim. None of the parties had disclosed qua the mortgage amount in their pleadings. Hence, the amendment sought is essential for the just decision of the case. No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE May 27, 2011 Gurpreet