IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1958 of 2008 KHIRIYA DEVI & ORS Versus PREMI PASI & ORS ----------- 3. 17.12.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. As a matter of fact whatever amendment in the plaint has been sought to be introduced only pertains to some subsequent event about which some preface or document has also been given. Such amendment petition, therefore, is not only clarificatory or explanatory in nature but having the tinge of incorporating the subsequent event, the same could not have been rejected. The plea of the petitioners that on account of such amendment the nature of the suit would change is only to be noted for its being rejected. Counsel for the petitioner would next contend that the defendant petitioners have a right of rebuttal. There is no escape in law from the aforementioned position but then rebuttal has to be limited to the amendment allowed in the plaint. That being so, it would be open for the petitioner to first file his additional written statement and thereafter produce their evidence including deposition of the 2 witnesses but having regard to amended portions in the plaint, would definitely confine its case only to the extent of amendment allowed in the plaint. However, before parting with this Court would clarify that the amendment even if it related to subsequent event all were of the year 2001 and therefore, if the same was sought to be incorporated after six years, a cost of Rs.800/- was hardly sufficient in the light of the harassment that would be caused to the defendant petitioner including filing of this civil revision application. In that view of the matter, the cost of Rs.800/- is enhanced to Rs. 2500/- which must be deposited by the plaintiff opposite party in the court below within four weeks of receipt/production of a copy of this order for effecting the aforementioned amendment in the plaint. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/