IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1537 of 2006 SMT.KRISHNA DEVI Versus SMT.SHAKUNTALA DEVI ----------- 3 8.12.2008 Heard counsel for the parties. Counsel for the petitioner while assailing the impugned order admits that even after death of the defendant no.3, the right to sue will still survive to the plaintiff. He further submits that such an application for substitution or deletion of the name of the defendant no.3 was filed belatedly and the Court has committed a jurisdictional error in allowing such belated application. In the opinion of this Court, the moment the petitioner is not in a position to show that on account of death of the defendant no.3, the right to sue will not be taken away, the suit will not abate. That apart, once it is admitted as has been also recorded in the impugned order that the defendant no.3 had not filed her written statement, the Court could have definitely exercised its power under Order XXII Rule 4(4) of the C.P.C. Such reasoned order of the Court below can be said to be vitiated by any error much less jurisdictional error. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and the same is hereby dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)