O VI, R 11 Amendment of Writing Statement The scope suit filed a voluntary written statement twice in response to the plaintiff for possession by way of partition and subsequently applied for the modification of the said written statement that the defendants argued His lawyer was supposed to sign the blank papers and a voluntary written statement was filed against the instructions given to him. The accuracy of the record indicates that the written statement was consented twice. The cap, which indicated that the defendants had acknowledged the contents of the plaintiff and that the matter was repeatedly postponed to affect the agreement between the parties, and it was not credible that the defendant was not aware of this. It was alleged that the lawyer had signed two written statements at a time without his consent. Entries in the applications were of a special nature and the admission party to the applications cannot be allowed to withdraw the same alternative to the written statement. If allowed, this would mean canceling the earlier two written statements. And can be converted to alternative written statement. Be allowed where, as a result of the plaintiff's evidence, a new defense was available to the defendants. The written statement had a completely different legal significance than the admission of the admissions. Usually the plaintiff acknowledged any fact in the written statement, And this could not be through the amendment, make such a fact later by denying the defendant a change of voluntary written statement denying any amendment revised will not be allowed
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
