IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.647 of 2009 SANTOSH KUMAR SAH, son of Late Hiralal Sah, resident of village- Phulhara Bazar, P.S. Rajapakar, District- Vaishali (owner as well as Driver of the Tempo No.BR-31B/1326) …. Petitioner (Opp.Party no.1 in claim case) Versus 1.PATO DEVI wifeof Late Shatrughan Manjhi 2.Shyamdeo Manjhi son of Late Shatrughan Manjhi Both of village- Dayalpur, P.S. Rajapakar, District- Vaishali ….. (Claimant)/Opp.Parties ----------- 2. 24/04/2009 It appears that by the impugned order, while rejecting the petition of the defendant- petitioner for amendment in the written statement on the ground that the defendant was setting up a new case, the principles governing the right of amendment in the written statement as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Usha Balashaheb Swami Vs. Kiran Appaso Swami, reported in AIR 2007 S.C.1663, was not taken into notice by learned court below. In the circumstances, learned court below is directed to hear the parties afresh on the prayer of the defendant-petitioner for amendment in the written statement made by him through petition dated 15.10.2008 and pass appropriate orders without being prejudiced by its own order dated 17.3.2009. - 2 - With the above observations and directions, this revision application is disposed of. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)