IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.853 of 2007 1. KUBER NATH PANDEY @ KUBER PANDEY, S/O PAHAWARI SARAN PANDEY AND 2. MANOJ PANDEY, SON OF PUJARI PANDEY, BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE – MAHESHPUR, P.O. JAMUNAHA BAZAR, P.S. KATEYA, DISTT. – GOPALGANJ. (DEFENDANTS) / PETITIONERS Versus 1. LALJEE YADAV, 2. UDAY NATH YADAV, 3. GORAKH YADAV, ALL SONS OF LATE SANCHIT YADAV, OF RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – RAIPURA, P.O. DHARAHARA MELA, P.S. KATEYA, DISTT. – GOPALGANJ, 4. MOSMAT SUSHILA, WIFE OF LATE PREMCHAND YADAV, 5. KUMARI SARITA AND 6. KUMARI GEETA, BOTH O.P. NOS. 5 & 6 ARE MINOR DAUGHTERS OF LATE PREMCHAND YADAV DULY REPRESENTED BY NEAREST HEIR NAMELY MT. SHUSHILA, ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE – RAIPURA, P.O. DHARHARA, P.S. KATEYA, DISTT. – GOPALGANJ …. (PLAINTIFFS)………….OPPOSITE PARTIES. ---------- For the Petitioners:- Mr. V.K. Prasad, Mr. Brajesh Kumar Singh and Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocates. --------- 2. 18.12.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The defendant – petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 13.02.2007, passed by the Sub Judge III, Gopalganj in Title Suit No. 322/2000, whereby the prayer of amendment of the plaint of the plaintiff had been allowed by the concerned court. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the amendment was filed at a very belated stage when the evidence of the plaintiff had been closed. It is also stated that he has not been given opportunity to file additional - 2 - written statement or amendment of written statement in view of the amendment made in the plaint. The trial court after hearing the submissions of the parties has come to the conclusion that the amendments should be allowed for the ends of justice and has ordered for that subject to payment of costs of Rs. 500. I do not find any jurisdictional error committed by the court concerned in the impugned order dated 13.02.2007. As a result, this Civil Revision is dismissed. However, if the defendants file a petition for amendment of written statement or additional written statement in view of the amendment which has been allowed by the impugned order dated 13.02.2007, that would be disposed of by the concerned court in accordance with law. dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )