JUDGMENT 1. Heard. 2. This intra-Court appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the Single Bench dated 21.1.2011 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8219/2010. The main matter is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Application was riled for seeking amendment in the original written-statement under Order 6, Rule 17 C.P.C. The D.R.T. by elaborating reasons dismissed the application filed under Order 6, Rule 17 C.P.C. The said order was assailed before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and the D.R.A.T. dismissed the appeal. Writ application was filed before the Single Bench Single Bench has also dismissed the writ application. Consequently, this intra-Court appeal has been preferred. 3. Shri Vinod Goyal, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has argued that amendment ought to have been permitted as there were subsequent events after filing of the original written-statement. 4. In our view, there is no merit in this intra-Court appeal. Application filed under Order 6, Rule 17 C.P.C. has been dealt with by the D.R.T. by elaborating reasons mentioned in paras 11 to 14 of the order. Matter was being examined by the C.B.I. has already been taken note of in the written statement. Subsequently, the DRAT has also examined the aforesaid facts and the Single Bench has exercised jurisdiction in accordance with law. 5. We do not find any error in the impugned-order so as to call for our interference therein. 6. Resultantly, this intra-Court appeal is dismissed in limine being devoid of merit.Appeal dismissed. *******