JUDGMENT 1.This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 10/9/2014 passed by Civil Judge, Class-I, Vidisha in Civil Suit No. 33-A/2013. By the aforesaid order, defendant no.1's application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC has been rejected. 2. Facts necessary for disposal of this petition are to the effect that a suit for permanent injunction has been filed against defendants as regards right of way through a passage in the suit premises. Parties have filed pleadings, issues have been framed and while the case was fixed for plaintiffs' evidence, defendant no.1 filed an application to bring on record the amendment to the effect that her two tenants are also living on the first floor of the suit premises, who are also using the suit passage and, therefore, it is necessary to bring on record the aforesaid tenancy in the suit. The trial court rejected the application for the reason that the amendment sought to be incorporated has undisputedly been in the knowledge of defendants no.1 and 2 and, therefore, there was no reason for not incorporating the aforesaid fact while filing (Smt. Sulochana and another Vs. Ajeet Kumar Jain and others) the written statement. Amendment after more than a year of filing of written statement and that too when evidence has commenced is nothing but to delay the trial of the suit. Therefore, the amendment was not found to be bonafide and accordingly trial court rejected the same. 3. Having gone through the order impugned, this Court is of the view that the trial court has not committed any error of law or jurisdictional error while rejecting the application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC. Accordingly, the writ petition sans merits is dismissed.