ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) THESE two civil revisions are directed against an order dated 27-9-1989 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Kendrapara. He disposed of two applications by the said order, one of which was filed by the plaintiffs for amendment and the other filed by the defendants for abatement of the suit. Both the applications were rejected by the learned Subordinate Judge.

( 2 ) I shall first deal with the application for amendment. Petitioners in Civil Revision No. 975 of 1989 have filed the suit for a declaration that (a) the defendants have not acquired any right, title and interest in the suit property on the strength of the document dated 18-1-1990; and (b) for a decree to restrain the defendants permanently in interfering with the possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land. The petitioners prayed for deletion of their prayer (a) and for substitution in its place a prayer to the effect that the document styled as deed of gift purported to have been executed by Osi Dei in favour of predecessor of defendant No. 1 is void, illegal, inoperative and liable to be set aside. Defendant No. 6 alone resisted the petition on the ground that the amendment would change