Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. Inspite of sufficient service no one has appeared for the defendants respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the suit has not yet been decided. Petitioner is plaintiff in O.S. no.2074 of 2001 which was instituted before Civil Judge ( J.D.), District Mau on 3.11.2003. Plaintiff filed an application for amendment in the plaint seeking amendment in the age of defendant nos. 4 and 5. In the plaint their ages was shown as 20 and 18 years. Through amendment it was prayed that their ages must be corrected as 13 and 12 years and they must be shown to be sued through their mother. Trial court through order dated 4.11.2003 rejected the amendment application holding that it was mala fide. Against the said order plaintiff petitioner filed revision no.72 of 2003 which was dismissed on 16.12.2010 by A.D.J. Court no.2, Mau hence this writ petition. The revisional court held that some admission was sought to be withdrawn. No malafides may be involved in giving wrong age in the instant case. No admission was sought to be withdrawn. Admission means such statement which is beneficial to the other side. Giving wrong age by no stretch of imagination could benefit the other side defendants. Only an error in the description was sought to be corrected. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed both the impugned orders are set aside. Amendment application is allowed. However, now both the defendants must have become major. Accordingly, in the amendment only their ages as on the date of filing of suit may be corrected. Thereafter it must be mentioned that now they are major hence there is no need to sue them through their guardian/mother. The suit shall be decided expeditiously. However, if the suit has already been decided ( as no stay order was granted in this writ petition) then this judgment shall stand automatically vacated and recalled and writ petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed as infructuous.