IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.561 of 2006 ASHOK KUMAR & ORS Versus SUMAN DEVI & ORS ----------- 3 15.10.2008 Heard counsel for the parties. In the opinion of this Court, the impugned order though technically correct, cannot be sustained on the ground of either equity or in law. The plaintiffs- petitioners, having been allowed amendment in the plaint, could not incorporate the same due to reason beyond their control. Such reasons advanced by them before the court below can not be said to be wholly impossible or at least attributable to the slackness on the part of the plaintiffs-petitioners themselves. At least for those reasons, the petitioners could not have been denied the benefit of an order in their favour allowing the amendment in the plaint. Counsel for the opposite parties has however submitted that whether the same was malafide or bonafide mistake/error on the part of the petitioner, its adverse consequence had to be undergone by the opposite parties, inasmuch as, they had to contest the suit for an unnecessary issue for a considerable length of time not only before the Court below but also before this Court. He would accordingly submit that a cost which - 2 - was quantified at Rs. 1000/- by the court below should not have been left to be realized and therefore, now at least this court should not interfere and leave the plaintiffs-petitioners to suffer from their own lapses and laches. Having given anxious consideration to the whole issue, this Court is of the view that the interest of justice would be better served if the amendment allowed in the plaint is directed to be incorporated. Thus the plaintiffs- petitioners however can do that only if they choose to compensate the defendants-opposite parties and accordingly this Court would allow this application by setting aside the impugned order on a condition that the petitioners must pay a sum of Rs. 5000/- within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order to the defendants-opposite parties, whereafter the court below would allow the petitioner to incorporate the amendment in the plaint. With the aforementioned observations and directions this Civil Revision application is allowed. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)