IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.861 of 2008 GOPAL YADAV @ GOPAL PRASAD Versus SMT. JANKI DEVI & ORS ----------- 3. 23.4.2009 Having heard Counsel for the petitioner on merits, this Court would find that there is no jurisdictional error in the impugned order rejecting a wholly belated amendment in the plaint. It has to be noted that originally when the suit was filed in the year 1989, the prayer made therein was confined to seeking a declaration that opening of khata in the revisional survey records in respect of the suit land in the name of defendants was illegal, incorrect and without jurisdiction and a permanent injunction was prayed for restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the suit land. On such pleadings and prayer in the plaint, the plaintiff- petitioner had led his evidence and his evidence was closed on 26.8.1998. Thereafter the defendants had also examined their witnesses and when on account of certain death the hearing in the suit had been delayed, due to belated appearance of heirs of defendant no.3, the plaintiff-petitioner found good opportunity now to come out with an entire new case and therefore without amending any of the paragraphs of the plaint sought a new relief altogether by seeking to delete the entire prayer in the original plaint and substituting it by a prayer that his right, title and interest over the entire suit land should be declared. In the 2 opinion of this Court, such amendment was not only belated and malafide but was capable of changing the entire nature of the suit. That being so, the court below has not committed any jurisdictional error in rejecting the frivolous prayer seeking amendment of the plaint and, therefore, this Court would find no reason to interfere with the same. This application is accordingly dismissed. Narendra/ ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. )