Short Note : 1. After the preliminary decree was passed and affirmed on appeal by the High Court, the defendant moved an application for amendment of the written statement alleging that the plaintiffs are money-lenders. The trial Court allowed the application for amendment. 2. Held : It appears that the trial Court did not consider the effect of allowing this amendment application. In a suit in which preliminary decree has been passed, allowing an amendment of a written statement will result in reopening of the suit and consequently, setting aside of the preliminary decree passed in the suit. In the present case, the preliminary decree has been affirmed by the High Court and it could, therefore, not be disputed that the learned lower Court could not set aside the decree and reopen the suit. The trial Court committed a material irregularity. S. Burrayga v. Atahayamma, AIR 1959 AP 26 , distinguished. Revision allowed.