IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14294 of 2011 Dadan Chobey Versus Bibi Chand Tara Khatoon ---------------------------------- 03. 06.09.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the defendant No.3 against the order dated 04.05.2011 passed by Munsif, Gopalganj in Title Suit No.63 of 2007 whereby the learned Court below allowed the substitution of the legal representatives of plaintiff No.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the plaintiff No.2 died prior to institution of the suit but the other plaintiffs filed the suit making him as plaintiff No.2 by forging his signature and, therefore, the petitioners filed an application on 08.11.2007 for dismissing the suit on the ground of fraud as a dead person has been made plaintiff. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned trial Court considered the case of both the parties and the explanation was given before the Court below to the effect that after signing the Vakalatnama, the plaintiff No.2 died prior to presentation of the plaint and the other two plaintiffs were pardanashin who had no knowledge about his death and, therefore, his name would not be deleted. The learned Court below accepted this explanation 2 given by the plaintiffs and therefore, allowed the application and substituted the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiff No.2 and directed to pay cost of Rs.400/-. In such circumstances, I do not find any jurisdictional error in the order. Accordingly, it is not a fit case where supervisory jurisdiction is required to be exercised. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)