IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9602 of 2011 Heera Devi & Ors Versus Butan Kumar Pathak &Anr ---------------------------------- 4. 08.09.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This application has been filed against the order dated 5.6.2009 passed by Subordinate Judge-Ist, Sitamarhi in Misc. Case No. 10 of 2003 whereby the learned court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that the amendment application has been filed at the time of hearing of the suit and, therefore, it is hit under the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below based the decision considering the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court wherein it has been held that the proviso to Order 6 Rule 17 which has been added by Act No. 22 of 2002 is mandatory. In such view of the matter when the impugned order is based on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the same cannot be interfered with in supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Thus, this writ application is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)