IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.486 of 2009 SHIV KUMAR RAI Versus MAHENDRA RAI ----------- 3. 27/03/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This application has been filed by the defendant petitioner against order dated 17.1.2009 passed by Munsif, Sikrahana at Motihari in Title Suit No.58 of 2004, by which the application of the defendant petitioner under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the written statement has been rejected. Learned court below has rejected the application on the premise that the amendment sought for by the defendant will change the nature of the case and was filed with much delay as the evidence of the plaintiff has already been adduced. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Baldeo Singh and ors Vs. Manohar Singh & anr., reported in (2000)6 S.C.C.498, to contend that the principles applicable for entertaining application for amendment of the plaint is not strictly applicable in the case of application for - 2 - amendment of the written statement and hence change of case of the parties cannot be a ground for rejecting the application for amendment of the written statement. This proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court was not before learned trial court at the time of consideration of the application of the defendant petitioner for amendment of the written statement. In the circumstances, order dated 17.1.2009 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to learned trial court for reconsideration of the matter in accordance with law after giving due opportunity to the parties and after hearing them. This revision application is thus disposed of with the above observations. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)