Supreme Court Cases 341, the Apex Court has held that amendment of the plaint after commencement of the trial is permissible when by the proposed amendment the plaintiff is making clear and explicit what was already implicit in Plaint. The nature of the suit does not change in such circumstances. It was also held that the amendments which are necessary for the purpose of determining real question in controversy between the parties, should be allowed if it does not change the nature of the case. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the learned trial Judge has already observed that one of the grounds alleged by the plaintiff for seeking eviction of the defendant is about permanent construction. The demolition prima facie took place during pendency of the suit on 3.10.2008. The learned trial Judge, therefore, thought it appropriate to allow the amendment as it would facilitate resolution of the dispute between the parties. I do not find that the learned trial Judge has committed any error in passing the impugned order. In any case, the impugned order is purely interlocutory. It is expressly made clear that where the decree is appealed from by the petitioner, any error, defect or irregularity in the impugned order affecting the decision of the case, may be set forth as a ground of objection in Memo of Appeal. Subject to above, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed.
