IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.992 of 2006 CHAMELI DEVI & ORS Versus RAM PYARI DEVI & ORS ----------- 6. 21.10.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioners. In the opinion of this Court the impugned order refusing amendment in the plaint does not suffer from any jurisdictional error. The amendment sought in the plaint was a wholly malafide, inasmuch as the suit was filed in the year 2000 valuing Rs. 5500/-. Thereafter when the defendants had filed a written statement, they had specifically questioned the valuation of the suit and at that point also the plaintiffs petitioners did not wake up, rather after five years of filing of the suit also when the issues were being framed the plaintiffs petitioners took a clear and categorical stand that the suit was properly valued and accordingly, one of the issues framed by the court below was as with regard to valuation of the suit. After all this, the plaintiffs petitioners came out with an application on 5.10.2005 seeking revision of valuation of the suit from Rs. 5500/- to Rs. 3,11,750/-. 2 This was definitely a calculated end to get away from the court in seisin of the suit which had in fact by the same impugned order also fixed the case for hearing on a preliminary issue raised by the defendants no. 1 and 3 as with regard to maintainability of the suit on the ground of resjudicata. Such practice of the plaintiffs of valuing a suit to be Rs.5500/- continuing with the proceedings for next 5-6 years and thereafter getting it enhance cannot be permitted in view of the provisions of Order 6 Rule 17 C.P.C. which has a very sanguine purpose and should not be allowed to be abused in the manner chosen to be done so by the plaintiffs petitioners. That being so, this Court would not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. This civil revision application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/