IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11267 of 2011 Sudama Rai Versus Smt.Pana Devi & Ors ----------- 02. 15.07.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application is directed against the order dated 05.05.2011 passed by Munsif 1st, Chapra in Title Suit No.19 of 1999 whereby the learned Court below allowed the amendment in the plaint of the plaintiff-respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that partition suit was filed by the plaintiff- petitioner in the year 1999 and after 13 years, the plaintiff filed the amendment application praying for declaration that the Basgit purcha issued by the authorities under the Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act is void. The learned counsel submitted that since this prayer is barred by limitation, the learned Court below could not have allowed the amendment application. The learned counsel further submitted that even a separate suit could not have been filed by the plaintiff-respondent because this relief is barred. From perusal of impugned order, it appears that the declaration sought for was only to declare the purcha as void. In a decision reported in A.I.R.1950 2 page 247(Bibi Saleha v. Zakariya Khan), a Division Bench of this Court has already held that in title suit, any prayer is made for declaration of a document to be void, Article 59 of the Limitation Act is not applicable. In such view of the matter, I do not find any merit in this writ application. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)