IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9724 of 2011 LAXHMAN PANDEY Versus SRI NIWASH PANDEY & ORS ----------- 02. 27.06.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 28.04.2011 passed by the Munsif 1st, Buxar in Title Suit No.33 of 2009 whereby the learned Court below has rejected an application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being added as defendant in the suit. The petitioner filed the aforesaid application for being added as party on the ground that he has purchased portion of the subject matter of the suit by registered sale deed dated 17.11.1972. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that learned Court below found that the subject matter of the suit is land comprised within Khata No.48 and in the sale deed, the property has been purchased from Khata No.26. Therefore, there is difference regarding Khata number. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is a mistake in the registered sale deed and in fact, he has purchased lands out of Khata N.48. So far this submission is concerned, it is a pure 2 question of fact and that cannot be considered at this stage while exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, if so advised, the petitioner may approach appropriate forum by filing appropriate application for the redressal of his grievance. Thus, I find no merit in this writ application. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Saurabh ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)