JUDGMENT This revision petition, presented u/s 115 of the Code of the Civil Procedure (for short the Code) is directed against order dated 27.9.93 rendered by the 1st. Add1. Judge to the Court of District Judge, Shajapur allowing application moved by non-application No.1 under O. 6, R. 17 of the Code. I have heard Shri S.A. Mev, learned counsel for the applicant on admission. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the non-applicant No.1 has filed the civil suit against the applicant on the footing of contract. The applicant oppugned the suit on the ground of bar of limitation. The relevant Issue No.6 was framed to cover this controversy. Arguments on this issue were heard by the trial Court and case was posted for orders. On the date of order i.e. 16.8.93, the non-applicant No.1 filed the application for leave to amend the pleadings. By the impugned order this application was allowed. Aggrieved by this order, the applicant has filed this revision petition. Under O. 6, R. 11 of the Code, the pleadings can be amended. This provision provides as under:- "O. 6, R. 17 Amendment of pleadings -- The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner anti on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties." The counsel for the applicant submitted that pleadings are not amendable if the suit is barred by time. However, when the application is allowed, the applicant is free to raise all objections as may be available under the law, through consequential amendment. In AIR 1983 SC 219(Haridas Aildas Thandani & ors. v. Godrej Rustom Kermani) it is held as under: "The Court should be extremely liberal in granting prayer of amendment of pleading unless serious injustice or irreparable loss is caused to the other side. A revisional Court also ought not to lightly interfere with a discretion exercised in allowing amendment in absence of cogent reasons or compelling circumstances." The scope of interference in revisional jurisdiction is quite little and limited. As the right of consequential amendment is available, it cannot be said that if the order is allowed to stand, it shall occasion failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the applicant. As the right of consequential amendment is available, it cannot be said that if the order is allowed to stand, it shall occasion failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to the applicant. In the circumstances, this revision petition fails and is dismissed summarily without notice to the other side.