IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.680 of 2009 1. RAMJEE SINGH, S/O LATE JADUNATH SINGH 2. LAXMAN SINGH, S/O LATE RAJKESHWAR SINGH 3. GUNJESHWAR SINGH, S/O LATE SHEOJANAM SINGH ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE-SARHULA, P.S.- MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR AT BHABHUA. 4. BRAHMA SINGH, S/O LATE MURAHU SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-ADHWAR, P.S.-MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR AT BHABHUA. ………PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS 2ND SET Versus 1. NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHARY @ WAKIL CHOUDHARY @ NARENDRA KUNWAR, S/O RAMASHISH CHOUDHARY, R/O VILLAGE-DARAWA, MALLAHTOLI, P.S.-MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR AT BHABHUA. OPPOSITE PARTY/ PLAINTIFF. 2. CHANDA KUNWAR, W/O LATE SATISH AGRAWAL 3. GOLU AGRAWAL, MINOR SON OF LATE SATISH AGRAWAL, REPRESENTED THROUGH HIS MOTHER AS NATURAL GUARDIAN NAMELY CHANDA KUNWAR. OPPOSITE PARTY NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE-DARAWA, MALLAHTOLI, P.S.-MOHANIA, DISTRICT-KAIMUR AT BHABHUA. …………OPPOSITE PARTY/DEFENDANTS 1ST SET ----------- 2 30.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This revision application has been filed by the defendant against order dated 23.1.2009 passed by learned Sub-Judge-I, Kaimur at Bhabhua in Title Suit No. 229 of 2005. By the said order the learned court below has allowed the petition of the plaintiff filed under Order 6 Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. for amendment in the plaint. From the impugned order, it appears that the learned court below has found that the proposed amendment does not change nature of the suit and in the interest of justice for final adjudication of the dispute between the parties - 2 - the amendment was fit to be allowed. Since the amendment petition was filed at belated stage, the court below has imposed cost of Rs.500/- also on the plaintiff. This Court does not find any error in the approach of the learned court below and does not find any merit in the revision application and the same is dismissed. However, the defendant will be at liberty to file any additional written statement in view of the amendment in the plaint and, thereafter, the court will proceeded with the suit in accordance with law, if necessary by permitting the parties to adduce additional evidence strictly in respect of the amendment. In case, any prejudice is still caused to the defendant due to this late amendment in the plaint the defendant will be at liberty to raise it at appellate stage. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)