IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1253 of 2008 ANIL PRASAD SINGH Versus DR.GAFOOR ALI ----------- 2 12/9/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, the court below has totally misdirected itself while passing the impugned order. It ought to have gone into the pleadings in the plaint specially paragraph nos. 4,5,6 and 7 which would show nothing else but the suit to be one based on personal necessity, when the plaintiff-petitioner had clearly stated that he wanted eviction for settling his own nephew. The amendment sought in the prayer portion by using word ‘personal necessity’, in any view could have not changed the nature of suit. That being so, this Court cannot approve that order passed by the court below and therefore the impugned order is set aside. Court below is directed to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance 2 with law. This application is allowed with the above direction/ observation. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar