Sl.27 25.08.2026 Court No.6 BP C.O. 2803 of 2026 Md. Irshad -versus- Wasi Ahmed alias Wasi Ahamed Mr. Dipankar Mandal Mr. Abdul Aziz Mondal ..for the petitioner Mr. Wasi Ahmed The opposite party (in person) Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the defendant and is directed against an order being no.29 dated 25th June, 2026 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court at Sealdah, 24 Parganas (South). Heard the opposite party in person. By the order impugned the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying for amendment of the written statement stood rejected. The opposite party filed a suit for eviction and for recovery of possession under the provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act. In such a suit the petitioner after entering appearance in the said suit filed a written statement. It is the specific case made out in the written statement that the defendant was inducted as a monthly 2 tenant in respect of the suit property at a monthly rental of Rs. 500/- payable as per the English Calendar month and an agreement for advance money was also executed in between the plaintiff and the defendant on 10th August, 2010 wherein the terms and conditions of the tenancy has been specifically stated therein. It was further contended by the defendant in the said written statement that as per the terms of the said agreement the defendant paid a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- on 10th August, 2010 by cash and after receiving the said amount the plaintiff issued a money receipt on that date. Thereafter, the defendant in the month of January, 2011 as per the terms of the agreement paid the balance amount of Rs.2,40,000/- but the plaintiff after receiving the said amount has not yet issued any money receipt. It is a further case made out by the defendant that the plaintiff never issued any rent bill to the defendant in respect of the suit property. The defendant contended that he has deposited monthly rent @ Rs. 500/- per month in respect of the suit property to the credit of the plaintiff before the learned trial judge from the month to month from March, 2011 to June, 2022 together with statutory interest @ 10% per annum month by month. The defendant denied that the defendant is a defaulter in respect of the suit property. However, by way of amendment, the defendant sought to make out a case that the defendant approached the plaintiff to purchase the suit property at a total 3 consideration of Rs. 5,40,000/- and an agreement was entered into on 10th August, 2016 and the entire amount was paid and it was agreed that the plaintiff would execute a registered deed of sale in favour of the defendant. The defendant sought to incorporate the fact that he has come to know that the suit premises is a thika tenanted property and there is a prohibition to transfer the property. The petitioner further sought to incorporate the fact that the defendant is not a monthly tenant under the plaintiff. It was further stated in the schedule of the amendment that the suit property being a thika tenanted property the civil court lacks jurisdiction to file the suit. After going through the proposed amendment this Court finds that the defendant seeks to take a new line of defence by way of proposed amendment that there was an agreement for sale of the suit property between the parties. In the original written statement it was a specific case made out by the petitioner that he was a tenant and such admission was sought to be withdrawn by way of amendment. It is well settled that by way of amendment, defendant cannot take a new line of defence. Withdrawal of admission by way of amendment is also not permissible. The learned trial judge assigned cogent reasons for rejecting the application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 4 This Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. Accordingly, C.O. 2803 of 2026 stands dismissed. There shall be, however, no order as to costs. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)