IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1351 of 2006 1. Kunji Lal Paswan, son of Late Ramcharitar Paswan. 2. Anurodh Paswan @ Anurodh Bhagat. 3. Mahendra Paswan @ Mahendra Bhagat. Both sons of Late Parichhan Paswan. All residents of Village-Kuwari Dharman Singh @ Kuwari Buzurg P.S. Hazipur Sadar, at present Ganga Bridge O.P, District-Vaishali. .......Plaintiffs in the court below....Petitioners. Versus 1. Mostt. Radha Devi, Wife of Late Rajatan Paswan. 2. Bashistha Paswan. 3. Patiya Paswan. Both sons of Late Ram Jatan Paswan. 4. Tetari Kumari. 5. Suman Kumari, Minor daughter of Late Ram Jatan Paswan under the guardianship of her mother Mostt. Radha Devi. 6. Mostt. Muneshari Devi,wife of Late Janakdhari Bhagat. 7. Phoola Devi. 8. Bela Devi. 9. Chameliya Devi. All daughters of Late Janakdhari Bhagat. 10. Shiv Narain Bhagat. 11. Shivdhari Bhagat. Both sons of Yadu Bhagat. `12. Monarki Devi, wife of Late Sheo Prasad Bhagat. 13. Amarjit Bhagat, son of Late Sheo Prasad Bhagat. 14. Kaushalya Devi. 15. Ila Devi. 16. Munni Devi. All daughters of Late Sheo Prasad Bhagat. 17. Mostt. Papali Devi, wife of Late Janeshwar Bhagat. 18. Jamtari Paswan. 19. Meghan Paswan. Both sons of Late Janeshwar Bhagat. 20. Kanti Devi. 21. Manti Devi. Both daughters of Janeshwar Bhagat. 22. Vipendra Bhagat, Son of Lali Bhagat. 23. Mostt. Muniya Devi, Wife of Late Laxaman Bhagat. 24. Rambali Bhagat. 25. Ashok Bhagat. Both sons of Late Laxaman Bhagat. 26. Shail Devi. 27. Usha Devi. Both daughters of Late Laxaman Bhagat. All residents of Village-Kowari Dhanman Singh @ Kowari Buzurg, P.S.Hazipur, Sadar Now Ganga Bridge O.P., P.O. Hazipur, District- Vaishali..............Defendant Ist set in the court below. ...............Opposite Party Ist set. - 2 - 28. Jang Bahadur Bhagat, Son of Tulsi Bhagat. 29. Daultiya Devi, Wife of Ram Swarup Paswan. daughter of Dwarika Bhagat, resident of Village-Chandralal, P.O. Hazipur, P.S.Hazipur Sadar, District- Vaishali. 30. Sheo Balak Bhagat Son of Dwarika Bhagat. O.P. No.28 and 30 are residents of Village Kowari Dhanmansingh @ Kowari Buzurg, P.S. Hazipur, Sadar Now Ganga Bridge O.P., P.O.Hazipur, District- Vaishali..........Defendant second set in the court below..Opposite Party 2nd set. 31. Ramchandra Bhagat. 32. Sheo Janam Bhagat. 33. Indradeo Bhagat. All sons of Late Yugal Bhagat. 34. Ramwati Devi, Wife of Late Chandra Shekhar Bhagat. 35. Anuradha Devi. 36. Kamni Devi. 37. Muni Kumari. All daughters of Late Chandra Shekhar Bhagat. 38. Mostt. Gaya Devi, wife of Late Parichhan Bhagat. All residents of Village-Kowari Dhanman Singh @ Kowari Buzurg, P.S. Hazipur Sadar,Now Ganga Bridge O.P, P.O. Hazipur, District- Vaishali....Plaintiff in the court below.....Opposite Party 3rd set..Opposite Parties. ----------- For the petitioners: Mr. Ratan Kumar Sinha, Advocate. For O.P. No.28 : Mr. Rudra Deo Kumar Sinha, Advocate. ----------- 12. 11.09.2009. Heard Mr. Ratan Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rudra Deo Kumar Sinha for the opposite party no. 28. Other opposite parties have not appeared despite notice. It is jointly submitted on behalf of the parties that the defendant no.9, who is opposite party no.28, in the civil revision application is only contesting the suit. From the perusal of the impugned order also, it appears that this issue has been opposed by the defendant no.9 only and upon hearing the plaintiffs as well as defendant no.9-opposite party no.28 the impugned order has been passed. Thus, it is submitted that this civil revision can proceed in the absence of the other opposite parties - 3 - against whom the civil revision is dismissed. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.28 has produced a copy of the plaint at the time of hearing for perusal of the court to show that the reliefs have only been sought against the defendant second party and out of the defendant second party, it has been jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the parties, only defendant no.9- opposite party no.28 is contesting the suit. Thus, in my view this civil revision is competent to proceed with even in the absence of the opposite party nos. 1 to 9, 12 to 27, 29, 30(A) to 30(K) and 31 to 38. This civil revision application is directed against the order dated 22.5.2006 passed by the Munsif Ist, Vaishali at Hazipur in T.S. No. 1 of 1994 whereby the petition for amendment of the plaint has been rejected by the court below. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the proposed amendment was not going to change the nature of suit. Therefore, the same should have been allowed by the court below. Learned counsel for opposite party no.28 submitted that on 19.3.1999 itself, written statement had been filed on behalf of the defendant after serving a copy thereof upon the plaintiffs clearly disclosing the fact that the defendant concerned had purchased the Plot No. 1592 by registered sale deed dated 14.1.1970. The plaintiffs did not take any step for amendment of plaint in this regard for several years and in the year 2006 they wanted such amendment only with a purpose to displace the defendants from the advantage gained. It is also submitted that four Plaintiffs’ witnesses - 4 - have already been examined by the court below. The court concerned upon hearing the rival submissions had come to the conclusion that the plaintiffs could not take steps for several years with regard to amendment in question, though, the factum of concerned sale deed was known to them from the date of filing of the written statement. Thus, it had rejected the prayer of amendment in the interest of justice. I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order dated 22.5.2006. Accordingly, the civil revision is dismissed. U.K. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan,J)