IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.318 of 2009 ****** BAIDYANATH SHARAN VERMA, son of Late Dr. Sita Ram Verma, resident of Village – Vijay Hata, P.S. Siwan Mufassil, District – Siwan and presently resident of Jai Prakash Nagar, Main Bazar, P.S. – Siwan Town, Siwan, District – Siwan…………………………... Plaintiff / Petitioner Versus PINKU KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, son of Bhagwan Prasad, resident of Village – Barhan Gopal, P.S. – Siwan Mufassil, District – Siwan…………………..Defendant / Opposite Party. ----------- For the petitioner:- Mr. Rajendra Narain and Mr. Sanjay Srivastava, Advocates. ******* 2. 26.02.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The plaintiff-petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 02.02.2009, passed by the Munsif-I, Siwan in Eviction Suit No. 1 of 2004, whereby certain amendments in written statement, as stated in Annexure-1 to this revision application, have been allowed by the court below. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure, the aforesaid petition ought to have been dismissed outrightly by the court concerned. The learned trial court has allowed the amendments - 2 - in the written statement upon hearing the rival submissions of the parties after holding that the same are necessary in the interest of justice and it has also imposed costs of Rs. 200/- on the defendant. It is well settled that wide power and unfettered discretion has been conferred on the court to allow amendment of the pleadings to a party in such manner and on such terms as it appears to the court to be just and proper. In this regard it would be apt to refer to a decision of the Supreme Court in Baldev Singh & Ors. Vrs. Manohar Singh & Anr., reported in (2006) 6 SCC 498, wherein it has been held that in case of amendment of written statement, the courts are inclined to be very liberal in allowing the same than of plaint and question of prejudice is less likely to operate with same rigour in the former than in the latter case. In view of the above, I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order. This Civil Revision is dismissed. dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )