Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. By the impugned order dated 27.10.2015, the court below allowed the amendment application filed by the plaintiff on the ground that no prejudice is being caused to the other side i.e. the petitioner.

3. Admittedly, the plaintiff’s evidence has not yet been closed. In other words, the evidence has not yet been started. From perusal of the amendment application, which has been annexed as annexure to this writ application, it appears that the amendment is sought for with respect to making some corrections in the plot numbers or area of the land in the body and also in the schedule and further relief has been sought for by way of amendment. The court below has allowed the said amendment.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that by way of amendment, the plaint is being overhauled and the earlier amendments made are being, now, again sought to be changed and further after commencement of trial, according to proviso to Order 6 Rule 17, amendment could not have been allowed. Further grievance is that the court below has passed a cryptic order without assigning any reason.

5. Admittedly, the defendants have not yet started evidence. The Hon’