IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16469 of 2011 Pankaj Kumar Baranwal & Anr Versus Om Prakash & Ors ---------------------------------- 02. 22.09.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This application has been filed for setting aside the order dated 18.04.2011 and 26.07.2011 passed by Sub Judge Ist, Motihari, East Champaran in title suit No.579 of 2009. By the impugned order dated 18.04.2011, the amendment application filed by the plaintiff was allowed and thereafter the petitioner filed recall application of the said order which was rejected by terms of order dated 26.07.2011. Both the orders have been impugned in this writ application. Admittedly, as has been submitted by the learned counsel that in this suit, issues have not yet been framed and, therefore, it appears that the learned Court below allowed the amendment at pre-trial stage. It is well settled principle of law that in view of Order 6 Rule 17, the Courts have got unfettered discretionary jurisdiction to allow amendments of the pleadings at any stage. In 2008 (14) Supreme Court cases 364, the Apex Court has held that the Court should liberally allow the pre-trial stage amendments and, therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)