IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1712 of 2006 AWADHESH PRASAD @ AWADHESH KUMAR, son of Ram Prasad Sao, resident of Sher Shah Road, Sadiquepur, P.S. Alamganj, P.O. Gulzarbagh, Distt. – Patna…………………………. Defendant – Petitioner Versus 1. RADHE SAO, 2. Ram Sewak Sao, both sons of Late Khubbi Sao, residents of Village – Jaitipur, P.S. Ghosi, Distt. Jehanabad……………… Plaintiffs – Opposite Parties. ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, No. 2, Advocate. ----------- 2. 19.02.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The defendant - petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 4.8.2006, passed in Title Eviction Suit No. 35 of 2002 by the Munsif, Patna City, whereby his petition filed under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the written statement has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the defendant – petitioner only wanted to amend his written statement by stating that the agreement concerned was written on stamp paper. He admits that factum of agreement has already been mentioned in written statement and it has come in the evidence of this defendant that the agreement was written. This is a suit for eviction under the Bihar Building - 2 - (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 on the ground of personal necessity and default. From the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, as aforesaid, it appears that even if the proposed amendment is not allowed, this defendant is not going to be prejudiced in any manner. In view of the above, I do not find this to be a fit case where this Court should exercise its discretionary revisional jurisdiction. As a result, this Civil Revision is dismissed. dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )