IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.12278 of 2011 Mukhi Devi & Ors Versus Upendra Kumar Verma @ Upendra ---------------------------------- 02. 03.08.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the defendants-petitioners against the order dated 06.06.2011 in Title Suit No.25 of 1987 passed by learned Munsif, Lakhisarai whereby the learned Court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner to recast issues in the suit. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that amendment in the written statement has been allowed by the Court below and, therefore, after amendment, the petitioners filed the application praying for to recast the issues and to add an issue that whether son of Punai, pre- deceased Punai. The learned Court below rejected the said prayer. According to the learned counsel because son of Punai Mahto pre-deceased, widow of pre-deceased will not inherit the property. So far this question is concerned after 1937, the widow of pre-deceased son is also class I heir. - 2 - Moreover, it is well settled principle of law that even if there is no issues, the parties are at liberty to adduce evidence in support of their pleadings and the issues if arises that can be considered at the time of final hearing also. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, this is not a case for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)