IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.4743 of 2010 1. BABY BINITA DEVI W/O ARBIND KUMAR SINGH, D/O HARI NARAYAN SINGH R/O VILL DEHARI, P.O.MUNGI, P.S.KARAHAT, DISTT-ROHTAS, AT PRESENT RESIDENT OF HASAN BAZAR, KAHAR ROAD, P.O.&P.S.HASAN BAZAR, DISTT-BHOJPUR AT ARA Versus 1. ARVIND KUMAR SINGH S/O SRI KANHAIYA PRASAD SINGH R/O VILL CHHATAUNA , P.S.NOKHA, DISTT- ROHTAS, AT PRESENT POSTED AS MICROWAVE TECHNICIAN , RAILWAY STATION NOKHA, P.O.NOKHA, DISTT-ROHTAS ----------- 2 27.4.2010 The acrimonious dispute between the husband and the wife has reached this Court at an interlocutory stage .The husband, who is the respondent herein, had sought an amendment of his plaint. The wife, who is the writ petitioner, opposes the amendment apprehending that several admissions of the husband, as made in the plaint, would stand withdrawn. The wife is contesting tooth and nail . Heard Mr. Basant Chaudhary, learned Senior Counsel in support of the writ petition as against the amendment allowed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtas and Mr. Jitendra Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the husband-respondent and with their consent , this writ application is being disposed of at this stage itself. To me, there is a difference when an admission, as made in the written statement, is sought to be withdrawn from the written statement and statement, as made in the plaint, is sought to be taken away by amendment. The same consideration do not operate in the two cases. The amendment sought in the plaint is that it is neither creating a new cause of action , which would otherwise be barred or 2 which would change the nature of Suit itself. Thus, the amendment had to be allowed. Petitioner’s apprehension is that there were some tacit admissions contained in the plaint, which are being withdrawn. I am not impressed. The pleadings, as made in the plaint, are matters of records. The amendment sought is also a matter of record. Petitioner- wife has a right to file a rejoinder/fresh written statement. She can easily demonstrate the verasity or falsity of the situation consequent to the amendment, if any or the effect of the amendment and the prejudice , if any, that is likely to be caused to her. It is not a case where the respondent in his written statement, had made some admission, which is not normally permitted. In view of the fact that the wife- petitioner has full opportunity to file an additional written statement and would have full opportunity in the trial Court, I do not think it proper to disallow the amendment, as sought for. If the two parties, the husband and the wife, have chosen to ignore matrimonial responsibility and are litigating then it is necessary that all allegations and counter allegations ,if possible, must be made and met with in one singular proceeding once for all. With the aforesaid observations, the writ application stands disposed of. Singh (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)