AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V. Nath, J. (Oral) - Heard Mr. Upender Prasad No. 2, the learned counsel for the petitioner in the interlocutory application as well as in the writ application.
The writ petitioner is the defendant in the suit. The writ petitioner filed a petition for amendment in his written statement by adding the averment that the Sikmi right according to the custom in his village was heritable and transferable. The learned court below allowed the said prayer for amendment. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the petition seeking permission to lead evidence.
The fact is not in dispute that the evidence on behalf of both the parties has now been closed and the matter has been posted for argument. The learned court below has also taken into notice of the fact that the prayer for adducing evidence has been made after a long delay.
After considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter.
The writ application is, accordingly, dismissed.