SATYA PRAKASH Vs. RAJENDRA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been directed against the order dated 28-10-1988 passed by 1st Additional Civil Judge, Farrukhabad by which an application under Order 6, Rule, 17, C.P.C. filed by the applicants has been allowed.

(2.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(3.) Palpably the revision is so ill-merited that it does not require even a detailed order. However, this Court in the case of Kamal Regmi Sharma v. Nepal Bank Ltd. and others, 1987 All, LJ 349, has held that the Courts are required to be extremely, liberal in granting the prayer for amendment of the pleadings. Further it is the settled law that the admission made by the parties may be withdrawn or explained away. The Court below has exercised its discretion in allowing the amendment. It does not require any interference, as no cogent reasons or compelling circumstances have been setforth. Neither any serious injustice nor any irreparable loss is likely to be caused to the applicants by allowing this amendment. Neither the Court below acted in exercise of the jurisdiction with any illegality nor with material irregularity.