IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.262 of 2009 Habibur Rahman son of late Md. Zahir, resident of Mohalla Imamganj, P.S. Sadar Town, District Muzaffarpur… …Defendant No. 2/Petitioner versus 1. Md. Ashraf, 2. Md. Moin, Both sons of late Abdul Khalique, 3. Baby Khatoon, 4. Nazaru Khatoon, Both daughters of late Abdul Khalique, All residents of Mohalla Imamganj, P.S. Sadar Town, District Muzaffarpur, 5. Malika Khatoon wife of Md. Ali Imam, daughter of late Abdul Khalique, resident of mohalla Kanhauli Dih, P.S. Mithanpura, District Muzaffarpur….(Plaintiffs), 6. The State of Bihar through the Collector, Muzaffarpur(Defendant No. 1)… …Opposite Parties. For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajendra Narain, Advocate … 2 18.02.2009 Heard Mr. Rajendra Narain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Defendant no. 2-petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.12.2008 passed by the Sub-Judge VI, Muzaffarpur in Title Suit No. 93/93, whereby the petition filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though it was pointed out by the defendant in his written 2 statement itself, as quoted at paragraph 4 of the civil revision application, that the suit, which was only for declaration of title with respect to schedule I land of the plaint and for further declaration that the survey entry in respect of schedule I land in the name of State of Bihar is wrong, could not be decreed in the absence of any relief with regard to confirmation of possession, still the plaintiff did not take any step for such amendment. After lapse of several years at the belated stage, steps for amendment were taken, thus, that ought to have been refused by the court below. The court below after considering the rival submissions has come to the conclusion that the proposed amendment would be in the interest of justice, and, thus, has allowed the amendment after awarding a cost of Rs. 1000/-. In that view of the matter, I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order passed by the court below. As a result, this civil revision application is dismissed. SC (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)