Opposite party no.1 as plaintiff filed T.S.No.7 of 2001 in the court of the le
arned Civil Judge (Sr.Division), Nayagarh impleading the petitioner and opposite party nos.2 t
o 22 as defendants for partition and permanent injunction. Pursuant to issuance of notice, def
endants 1 and 2 entered appearance and filed a comprehensive written statement. While the matt
er stood thus, they filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. to amend the written sta
tement. The same was objected to by the plaintiff. The trial court rejected the application fo
r amendment on the ground that defendants have not filed any document to show that the propert
ies are the joint family properties. It was further observed that issues have been framed.
Whether the properties described in the schedule of the written statement is a
joint family property or self acquired property, the said question cannot be gone into in an
application for amendment. To put in other words, the Court can not decide the merits of the c
ase while deciding an application for amendment. The same is not germane for consideration whi
le deciding the application for amendment
