[2025:RJ-JP:10880] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9417/2021 Ikramuddin Teli S/o Shri Jhuntha Teli, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Ward No. 14, Naya Bazar, Nagoriyo Ka Mohalla, Kasba Chomu, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Mohammad Yunus S/o Late Ikramuddin, R/o Naya Bazar, Kasba Chomu, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. 2. Anwar Hussain S/o Late Ikramuddin, R/o Naya Bazar, Kasba Chomu, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur. 3. Sub Registrar, Sub Registrar Office, Chomu, District Jaipur. 4. District Collector, Collectorate Office, Banipark, Jaipur, District Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Jindal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : None present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Order 10/03/2025 This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant (for short ‘the defendant’) against the order dated 18.03.2021 passed by Additional District and Session Judge No. 10, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Headquarter-Chomu in civil suit No. 8/2014 (for short ‘the trial Court’) titled as “Mohammad Yunus and Ors. Vs. Ikramuddin and Ors.”, whereby the application filed by the defendant under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC has been dismissed. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that respondent Nos. 1 and 2-plaintiffs (for short ‘the plaintiffs’) filed a civil suit for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 15.04.2004 and 05.03.2005 and permanent injunction against the defendants. [2025:RJ-JP:10880] (2 of 2) [CW-9417/2021] During the pendency of the suit, defendant moved an application before the trial Court under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment in the written statement in which it was mentioned that during the pendency of the suit, respondent No. 2 included his name in the registration certificate dated 14.02.2014 issued under the Rajasthan Shop and Commercial Establishment Act, 1958 but the trial Court vide order dated 18.03.2021 dismissed the application filed by the defendant. Learned counsel for the defendant further submits that respondent No. 2 in collusion with Kajodmal Yadav prepared the said document. So, defendant wanted to amend his written statement but the trial Court vide order dated 18.03.2021 wrongly dismissed the application filed by the defendant. So, the amendment sought by the defendant be allowed. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the defendant and perused the impugned order. It is an admitted position that the present suit is for specific performance of contract. Plaintiffs had not amended the pleading, which could necessitate the defendant to amend his written statement. So, in my considered opinion, trial Court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendant regarding amendment in the written statement. So, the present petition filed by the defendant being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir/118