IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14777 of 2010 1. LAL JHARI DEVI D/O LATE SITARAM RAI AND W/O JAGDISH RAI R/O VILL.- MALAHAN SHITALPUR, P.S.- SHITALPUR, DISTT.- SARAN, AT PRESENT R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN Versus 1. CHAMPA DEVI W/O LATE SITARAM RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 2. SARIKHAN RAI S/O MANSHI RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 3. RAJESHWAR RAI S/O LATE RAGHUNANDAN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 4. RAJ BALLABH RAI S/O LATE RAGHUNANDAN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 5. SHANKAR RAI S/O LATE RAGHUNANDAN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 6. SUKHALI DEVI W/O LATE JAI NARAIN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 7. CHHATHU RAI S/O LATE JAI NARAIN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 8. DAROGA RAI S/O LATE JAI NARAIN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN 9. MANAGER RAI S/O LATE JAI NARAIN RAI R/O VILL.- GAURA TOLE BAWAN, P.O.- GAURA, P.S.- MARHAURA, DISTT.- SARAN ----------- 2. 24.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. It is submitted that the petitioner has no objection to the order dated 22.12.2009 of Sub Judge-VI, Chapra in Partition Suit No. 444 of 2006 in so far as it allows the substitution of Champa Devi wife of Late Sitaram Rai. It is however submitted that the impugned order suffers from an error of record in so far as it states that no application had been filed 2 to the effect that Lal Jhari Devi, the petitioner was daughter of late Late Sitaram Rai. In fact the application of the petitioner for intervention based on that relationship was already on record and was pending consideration. If the order dated 22.12.2009 suffers from an error on record and does not take into consideration or is contrary to material already available to hold to the contrary, the remedy of the petitioner lies in first approaching the Court concerned inviting its attention to the error of record. If the petitioner files any application in context of the order dated 22.12.2009, that it wrongly non suited her without considering that her application for intervention was already pending on record, let the same be considered by the trial Court after examination of its records in accordance with law. The writ application stands disposed with the aforesaid observation. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)