IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1171 of 2007 TANUK LAL YADAV Versus MUSAK LAL YADAV & ORS. ----------- 3. 24.04.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the limitation petition bearing I.A.No.3455 of 2007 and also on the merit of this revision application. For the reasons stated in the interlocutory application, the same is allowed and delay in filing this civil revision application is condoned. By the impugned order, the learned court below has rejected the petition of the plaintiff dated 3.2.2007 for placing clean typed copy of schedule with amendments incorporated with due signature and endorsement etc. on the same along with the plaint in view of the amendment allowed earlier by the court in the schedule of the plaint of the partition suit. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the amendment was allowed by the court, the plaintiff was required to incorporate the amendments in the schedule of the plaint. However, since it was not possible to incorporate all the amendments in the schedule of the plaint - 2 - due to lack of space on the relevant pages, it was prayed by the plaintiff to place the plain typed copy of the schedule after incorporating the amendment with the plaint and hence, there was nothing wrong in the prayer for the court to reject the same. It appears from the impugned order that alternative prayer was also made by the plaintiff for direction of the court to make amendment application itself a part of the plaint. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court ought to have examined the plaint itself and amendment sought to be incorporated in the same and if it appeared that due to lack of space on the relevant pages of the plaint, it was not feasible to incorporate all the amendments so as to be legible in the plaint, it could consider the addition of plain typed copy of the relevant pages duly certified and supported by the affidavit of the plaintiff, or, in the alternative, the court below should also consider the desirability of appending the amendment petition itself which was allowed by the learned - 3 - court earlier with the plaint. In the circumstances, this civil revision application is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.2.2007 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned court below to consider the same, in the light of above observations, and pass appropriate orders. B.T (J.N Singh, J)