IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16185 of 2011 Janki Devi & Ors Versus Bhadai Yadav & Ors ---------------------------------- 04. 11.11.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. By the impugned order dated 12.07.2011 passed by Sub Judge VI, Gopalganj in title suit no.70 of 1999, amendment application filed by the plaintiff has been allowed partly. The petitioners who are defendants have challenged that part of the order whereby the amendment has been allowed. Since the provision as contained in Order 6 Rule 17 gives unfettered power on the Court to allow any party to amend their pleadings at any stage in such manner and on such terms as may be, just and proper, by the impugned order, the learned Court below has exercised the jurisdiction and allowed the application. Only on the ground of delay or that the amendment is not necessary, the amendment cannot be rejected. I, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the impugned order as it cannot be said that the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional error. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Saurabh ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)