IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8530 of 2011 RAM UCHIT PRASAD GUPTA @RAM UCHIT GUPTA Versus RAM PRASAD GUPTA & ORS ----------- 5. 16.05.2011 By impugned order, the amendment in written statement has been allowed after the plaintiff’s argument was closed. Defendant argument was continuing. From perusal of the impugned order it reveals that in order to give benefit, proviso has been appended to under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Court has not dealt with the requirements to give benefit of the said proviso. Therefore, the impugned order dated 30.5.2009 in Money Execution No. 03 of 2003 passed by learned Subordinate Judge, Darbhanga is set aside. The trial court is directed to dispose of the application for amendment moved by the defendant respondent afresh after hearing both the parties in accordance with the law. Petition is disposed of. Ravi/- ( Prakash Chandra Verma, j.)