IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11504 of 2011 Sheo Prasad Choudhary & Anr Versus Gopal Bhagat ----------- 02. 19.07.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 19.05.2011 passed by Subordinate Judge VIIth, Gopalganj in Title Suit No.111 of 2009 whereby the learned Court below allowed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the amendment of the plaint awarding cost of RS.300/- . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Court below has wrongly allowed the application because if the amendment is allowed it will change the nature of the suit and the plaintiff is withdrawing the categorical admission made in paragraph 6 of the plaint. The learned counsel further submitted that after such a long delay, i.e., after examination of 6 witnesses, this amendment application has been filed. From perusal of the impugned order, it 2 appears that the learned Court below has considered the submissions made by learned counsel and considering the fact that there is some delay and some hardships will be caused to the petitioner has awarded cost of RS.300/- and it may be mentioned here that because of the amendment, neither the nature of the suit is changed nor the categorical admission of the plaintiff is being withdrawn. By the amendment only, explanation has been given by the plaintiff. It is well settled principle of law that amendment should be allowed liberally vide 2010 (4) P.L.J.R.355 Nalini Mishra Vs. Braj Kishore Mishra. In view of the above fact, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)