CR No. 5121 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 21315-CII of 2009 and CR No. 5121 of 2009 Date of Decision: 8.9.2009 Balwinder Kaur and others ....Petitioners. Versus Sukhwinder Singh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. S.S. Salar, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. C.M. No. 21315-CII of 2009 Allowed as prayed for. C.R. No. 5121 of 2009 The defendant-petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 19.8.2009 (Annexure P-5) passed by the lower appellate court whereby the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short “the Code”) for incorporation of certain facts in the written statement at the appellate stage, was dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the facts sought to be brought on record by way of amendment were CR No. 5121 of 2009 -2- necessary for just decision of the case but the application filed for that purpose has been dismissed erroneously. The lower appellate court while declining the aforesaid application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code, had noticed as under:- “After hearing rival contentions of both the parties and going through the record carefully, I find that the facts as mentioned in para 6 of the application, on the basis of which, the appellants wants to amend the written statement have already been taken by the said Mohan Singh, defendant No.2 in para no.2 of the written statement filed before learned lower court, which is reproduced as under: “That in the year 1999 the defendant called the plaintiff in the police station and with the help of police officers the plaintiff obtained the signatures of defendant on some blank papers as well as stamp papers under threat and coercion and also obtained a blank cheque no. 495423.” And in para no.6 of the application, it has also been mentioned that the plaintiff got arrested Mohan Singh defendant by the illaqa police and got his signatures on blank papers, stamp papers and also got a post dated cheque as security of loan. Thus, I am of the view that the present amendment is not necessary CR No. 5121 of 2009 -3- for the just decision of the case, rather it has been created again just to delay the matter and to prolong the case. Moreover, taking into consideration these facts, the learned lower court has already decided the matter by way of impugned judgment and decree and as such, no ground is made out to allow this application. Here, I do not feel any hesitation to say that such like applications are filed by the parties just to waste valuable time of the courts and not to assist the courts. Accordingly, with these observations, the present application deserves to be dismissed and it is ordered, accordingly. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and in view of the above observations of the lower appellate court, this Court is satisfied that there is no illegality or perversity in the order impugned herein, dated 19.8.2009 passed by the lower appellate court which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, there is no merit in this revision petition and the same is hereby dismissed. September 8, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE