Aditya Nath Mittal, J.

Vakalatnama filed by Shri S.K.Mehrotra for the sole respondent is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. This revision has been filed against the order dated 21.01.2015 passed in Civil Suit No. 193 of 2005 by Civil Judge (S.D.) Unnao, by which Application No. Ga-160 has been allowed.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist is the plaintiff of the suit and he had filed the affidavit in support of the case for which objection was raised that some unnecessary points have been raised in the said affidavit. It has also been submitted that the plaintiff is required not only to meet out his case but also the case taken in the written statement, therefore, it is not required that the evidence of the plaintiff should be confined to the pleadings but it has to be confined to the matter in issue.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the revision is not maintainable because the learned court below has not rejected the evidence on affidavit but has only asked the plaintiff to file amended affidavit in view of objection raised.

6. It is a suit for mandatory injunction by