ORDER : K. Ravichandrabaabu, J. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order made in I.A. No. 1248 of 2010 in O. S. No. 45 of 2005 rejecting the petitioner's application seeking for amendment of the plaint. 2. The petitioner herein as the plaintiff filed O. S. No. 45 of 2005 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Jayamkondam seeking for recovery of a sum of Rs.13,750/- with interest towards the damages caused by the respondent/defendant in the suit property. When the suit was filed, the petitioner had shown four items of properties in the schedule as suit properties comprising in S. Nos. 93/4, 93/7B, 93/8B and 93/10A of Ambappur Village. Consequent to the filing of the written statement by the respondent/defendant, the petitioner came to know that the description of the property in the plaint schedule was not correct and therefore he filed the above application seeking for amendment under Order 6 Rules 16 and 17 of C. P. C. for amending the plaint schedule showing the suit property in S. No. 96/3A with an extent of 0.34.5 ares by giving specific boundaries to the said property. 3. The petitioner in support of such application filed an affidavit wherein he has stated that he had wrongly described the properties in the plaint schedule at the time of filing of the suit based on the information available in the patta without looking into the fact that some of the items of the properties mentioned in the patta were already sold by him. The petitioner further stated that he came to know about the correct survey number with specific extent and boundaries only after the respondent/defendant filed the written statement and on getting further information from the Village Administrative Officer. The said application was resisted by the respondent herein. The Court below rejected the said application on the ground that the nature of the suit would be changed if the amendment of the plaintiff is allowed. 4. Though notice was served on the respondent, he has not chosen to appear before this Court either in person or through counsel. 5. I have perused the materials placed before this Court and also considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Though notice was served on the respondent, he has not chosen to appear before this Court either in person or through counsel. 5. I have perused the materials placed before this Court and also considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The suit is filed claiming dam- ages of Rs.13,750/- from the respondent/ defendant by specifically contending that the defendant had prevented the plaintiff/petitioner from drawing water to this land from the irrigation channel on 18-12-2004. Therefore, the suit is one for seeking damages from the respondent/defendant based on the said averment. According to the petitioner, while describing the suit property, he had wrongly mentioned certain survey numbers based on the information available in the patta with- out reference to the fact that some of the items were already sold by him. In any event, he has filed the present application seeking for amendment only to correct the suit survey numbers and extent of the suit property with specific boundaries which, in my considered view, would not alter the nature of the suit or give rise to a different cause of action. By making such amendment, the relief sought for is not altered and only the description of the survey numbers of the suit property is altered. Certainly, such alteration of the description of the suit property will not change the nature of the suit. Therefore, the reasoning given by the Court below is not correct and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to succeed in this Civil Revision Petition. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order of the Court below is set aside. Consequently, the application in I. A. No. 1248 of 2010 in 0. S. No. 45 of 2005 is allowed. The connected M.P. is closed. No costs. Petition allowed.