IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2059 of 2008 SHUBH NARAYAN MISHRA & ANR Versus KISHUN PANDIT & ANR ----------- 4 07.01.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioners. For the reasons mentioned in I.A. No. 7284/2008, the delay in filing of this Civil Revision Application is condoned. On merits, this Court would find that the prayer of deleting the name of Pyari Pandit, defendant No. 2 and deleting one of the suit land being Plot No. 590 purportedly on the ground of subsequent event of a sale deed allegedly accepted by the plaintiff in favour of one Pyari Devi, in normal course was definitely fit to be allowed but on perusal of the sale deed itself it is found that the same was executed in favour of Pyari Devi. There is nothing to show that as to how Surji Devi who is not a party to the suit and to whom plot No. 590 has been conveyed during the pendency of the suit can lead to amendment in the plaint as with regard to either deleting the name of Pyari Devi or the plot in question Plot No. 590. As a matter of fact, the petitioners had not even given detail of such sale deed or even the date of such sale deed in the Court below in the application filed for this purpose and had never produced the copy of the - 2 - sale deed which has eventually been produced before this court. That being so, this Court is satisfied that the impugned order does not suffer from any jurisdictional error and the conclusion arrived by the Court below is absolutely correct. That being so, this Civil Revision application is wholly misconceived and is hereby dismissed. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)