[2025:RJ-JP:4584] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18831/2024 1. Liaqat Khan Son Of Late Shri Rahim Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) 2. Smt. Anwari Wife Of Late Shokat Khan Daughter-In-Law Rahim Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) 3. Afzal Son Of Late Shokat Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) 4. Firoz Khan Son Of Late Shokat Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) 5. Hamid Khan Son Of Late Shokat Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) 6. Parveen Daughter Of Late Shokat Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) 7. Sabina Daughter Of Late Shokat Khan, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) ----Petitioners Versus Smt. Mumtaz D/o Late Shri Rahim Khan, Aged About 70 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 35 Mominpura, Chejaron Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur- Shekhawati, District Sikar (Raj.) At Present Resident Of House No. 90-91, Sanjay Nagar-C, Near Noorani Masjid, Jhotwara, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M C Jain For Respondent(s) : Mr. Farooq Ahmed HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA [2025:RJ-JP:4584] (2 of 3) [CW-18831/2024] Order 03/02/2025 This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) against the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by Additional District Judge, Fatehpur Shekhawati, Sikar in civil suit No. 139/2016, whereby the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the defendants under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC. Learned counsel for the defendants submits that respondent- plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) has filed a suit for partition, rendition of accounts and permanent injunction against the defendants in which defendants filed an application before the trial Court under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC seeking permission to amend their written statement on account of typographical error crept therein. Due to typographical error, Rahim Khan’s share in disputed property was wrongly typed 1/5th instead of 1/4th. Defendants have also filed their written statement wherein it was typed as defendant Nos. 1 to 7 instead of defendant Nos.1 to 5. So, these are typographical error but the trial Court dismissed the application filed by the defendants. Learned counsel for the defendants submits that on account of said amendment no substantial change shall took place. So, the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by the trial Court be set aside. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the defendants and submits that on account of amendment as sought, there would be substantial change in the written statement of the defendants. So, the trial Court rightly dismissed the application filed by the [2025:RJ-JP:4584] (3 of 3) [CW-18831/2024] defendants. So, the present petition filed by the defendants being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the defendants as well as learned counsel for the plaintiff. It is an admitted position that the defendants had sought amendments on account of typographical error. So, in my considered opinion, trial Court had committed an error in dismissing the application filed by the defendants. So, the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by the trial Court deserves to be set aside. Accordingly, the petition filed by the defendants is allowed and the order dated 07.11.2024 passed by the trial Court is set aside and the trial Court is directed to take the defendants’ amendments in the written statement on record. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Tahir/23