1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.612 of 2006 RAM NATH SINGH Versus RAM BILASH SINGH & ORS ----------- 4. 20.10.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the issue relating to amendment of plaint confined to the facts relating to filing of a writ petition on 26.9.2000 in C.W.J.C. No. 10463/2000 in this Court, being admittedly subsequent events taking place after filing of the suit on 31.3.2000, could not and infact should not have been refused by the Court below while passing the impugned order. That being so, this Court would hold that part of the amendment as prayed in the application, as contained in Annexure 1 dated 28.4.2003 was fit to be allowed. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, however, would fairly submit that he is not going to make prayer for amendment in paragraph 11 of the plaint which was also prayed in the same application as with regard to declaration of being heir as the suit is out and out a partition suit. 2 In that view of the matter, the court below will reconsider the whole matter from an angle that the subsequent event as has been found to be noticed by the petitioner from the pleadings of C.W.J.C. No. 10463/2000 will be allowed but in no event any amendment would be allowed which would change the nature of partition suit as had been sought to be done by seeking also amendment in paragraph 11 of the plaint. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court below for reconsideration in the light of aforesaid observations and directions. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/