SHEETLA PRASAD Vs. CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Govind Saran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Dinesh Sengar, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the plaintiff challenging the judgement and order dated 30th July, 1985 passed by the appellate court in Misc. Appeal No. 96 of 82, whereby the order of the trial court dated 14.05.82, allowing the amendment application of the plaintiff under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC, has been set aside.

(3.) Sri Govind Saran, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his arguments to the limited issue of maintainability of the misc. appeal before the appellate court under the provisions of Order 43, Rule 1 CPC, against the order of the trial court under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC. He has referred to the said provisions to show that no misc. appeal could have been preferred against an order passed under Order 6, Rule 17 C.P.C. allowing an amendment application. Appropriate remedy against such an order, according to him, is by way of revision under Sec. 115 CPC.