The revision petitioner is the plaintiff. He filed a suit for declaration of title and for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his peaceful possession. An order of injunction was passed in his favour and that was vacated after hearing the defendants. This was on 19-9-85. The plaintiff filed an application to withdraw the suit with permission to file a fresh suit since according to him the defendants after the injunction was vacated, trespassed into the property and reduced into his possession on 20-9-85. The Court dismissed the application. Thereafter the plaintiff filed an application to amend the plaint seeking to substitute the prayer for decree for permanent injunction by a prayer for recovery of possession. The lower Court dismissed the application on the ground that the plaintiff was out of possession on the date of the suit and should have sued for possession and not injunction in the original plaint, that the question of dispossession during the pendency does not arise and the amendment, if allowed, would convert it into a new suit. That would prejudice the defendants. This order is now challenged.

2. Rule 17 of Orde