IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.74 of 2007 INDAL KUMAR & ANR Versus YADUNANDAN PRASAD & ORS ----------- 02. 02.05.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. This civil revision has been filed on behalf of defendants- petitioners challenging order dated 12.12.2006 by which the learned Subordinate Judge-VII, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda, rejected their petition dated 20.11.2006 for expunging paragraph nos. 13 and 15 of the affidavited examination-in-chief of DW.-4 Brijnandan Prasad in Title Suit No. 65 of 2001. The aforesaid suit was filed by plaintiff-opposite party no.1 for partition of the suit property claiming that the suit property originally belonged to Tilak Dhari Mahato, who was the common ancestor of the plaintiff and original defendant nos.1,2 and 3. The defendants appeared and after completion of their respective pleadings issues were framed and examination of witness was started, whereafter plaintiff-opposite party no.1 examined all his witnesses, whereafter on 18.11.2006 defendant nos. 1,5 and 6 started evidence on their behalf and Brijnandan Prasad was produced as witness no.1 on their behalf and affidavited examination-in-chief was filed in the learned trial court in paragraphs 13 and 15 of which he stated something which was not in the pleadings of the parties. It transpires that much after on 20.11.2006 a petition was filed by petitioners-defendant nos.26 to 28 for expunging paragraphs 13,15 and 16 from the affidavited examination-in-chief of DW.-1. A - 2 - rejoinder was also filed by defendant nos.1,5 and 6 on 24.11.2006 claiming that the said petition filed by defendant nos.26 to 28 be rejected. Learned court below considered the entire matter in detail and came to the conclusion that the said DW.-1 was a witness of defendant nos. 1, 5 and 6 and hence, there was no occasion for the other defendants to raise any objection with respect thereto and expunging of statements of that witness would not be legal and proper at this stage as its validity and significance would be considered at the time of final hearing of the suit and accordingly the said petition was rejected by the learned court below by the impugned order. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court does not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order of the learned court below and accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)