IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8747 of 2011 Shri 108 Ram Janki And Shri 108 Hanumanjee Versus Smt.Shanti Devi & Ors ----------- 13. 08.11.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It appears that notices were issued when this writ application was Civil Revision. After notice, the respondent no.1 and 2 already appeared in the Civil Revision. Subsequently the Civil Revision was directed to be converted to writ application in view of the decision of the Apex Court as well as Division Bench of this Court. Thereafter the petitioner converted the Civil Revision application to this writ application. In my opinion, therefore, no further notice is necessary to the respondents because they have got the knowledge about the pendency of this writ application as in their presence the petitioner was permitted to convert the Revision application to writ application by terms of order dated 04.08.2010. The plaintiff filed this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 26.09.2006 passed by 1st Additional Munsif, Madhubani in title suit no.41 of 2002/31 of 2005 whereby the learned Court below rejected the amendment application filed by the petitioner praying for amendment in the plaint introducing the fact that during the pendency of the suit, the petitioner was dispossessed by the respondent and, therefore, it was prayed for adding a relief praying for recovery of possession also. 2 By the impugned order, the learned Court below rejected the said injunction application on the ground that the injunction petition was filed on 15.07.2002 wherein it was stated that he was in possession. In the amendment application, it was stated that the petitioner was dispossessed on 13.07.2002 and, therefore, there appears conflicting pleading. As stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner only issues have been framed and still today no evidence has been adduced by the plaintiff. Admittedly, according to the petitioner, he was dispossessed during the pendency of the suit, therefore, this is a subsequent event. From perusal of the order as contained in Annexure-1 which is certified copy of the order dated 12.07.2002, it appears that the injunction application was filed on 12.07.2002 and not on 15.07.2002 as observed by the Court below in the impugned order. Therefore, it appears a mistake apparent on the face of the record. Moreover, the amendment sought for is based on subsequent event and still today, the evidence in the suit has not been started. In Rajkumar Gurawara vs. S.K. Sarwagi, (2008) 14 SCC 364, the Apex Court has held that “a pre trial amendment should be allowed liberally as the opposite party would not be prejudiced because he will have an opportunity of meeting the amendment sought to be made.” Admittedly, as stated above in the present 3 case, the evidence has yet to be started in this case and only issues have been framed. In the said decision, the Apex Court also held that “it is settled law that the grant of application for amendment shall be subject to certain conditions, namely, (i) when the nature of it is changed by permitting amendment; (ii) when the amendment would result in introducing new cause of action and intends to prejudice the other party; and (iii) when allowing amendment application defeats the law of limitation.” In the present case, no prejudice is cause to the defendant and as stated above, the amendment is based on subsequent event. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the learned Court below has not exercised a jurisdiction vested in it by law by committing error of record and not considering settled principles of law. In view of the above facts, the impugned order is set aside and the application for amendment filed by the plaintiff-petitioner is allowed. The petitioner shall incorporate the amendment sought for within the period prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thus, this writ application is allowed accordingly. Saurabh ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)