IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11155 of 2011 Gopal Singh & Ors Versus Ganga Mahto & Ors ----------- 03. 26.07.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 24.03.2011 passed by learned Additional District Judge, F.T.C.-I, Rohtas at Sasaram in Title Appeal No.17 of 2002 as contained in Annexure-5 whereby the learned Court below has allowed the substitution application filed by the appellant-respondent for substitution of the legal representatives of the deceased respondent no.10 in the Title Appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after lapse of about 3 years, the learned trial court had no jurisdiction to allow the substitution application. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below found that the appellant is resident of Mohalla Bhartiganj whereas respondent no.10 is resident of village Dubauli, P.S.- Sasaram, District-Rohtas. Therefore, the learned Court below observed that they are residing in different villages. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Court below has allowed the 2 substitution application and substituted the legal representatives. In writ jurisdiction, the impugned order therefore, cannot be interfered with. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Saurabh ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)