IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1869 of 2006 Jitendra Singh son of Late Rameshwar Singh, resident of village- Sekhopur Raghunathpur Bheolora, Rampur, P.O. Faidpur, P.S. Naubatpur, district- Patna …. Petitioner Versus 1.Madheshwar Singh @ Madhlesh Singh, Son of Late Rajendra Singh 2.Manmati devi, wife of Late Bakhora singh 3.Raju Kumar 4.Shambhu Kumar both sons of Late Bakhora singh 5.Muntoo Singh, son of Late Mahendra Singh All residents of village Sekhopur Bhelora rampur, P.O. Faridpur, P.S. Naubatpur, District- Patna … Opp.Parties ----------- 3. 28/04/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party. This revision application has been filed by the plaintiff-petitioner against order dated 21.8.2006 passed by Munsif, Danapur in Title Suit No.58 of 2002. By the said order, learned court below has rejected the petition of the plaintiff filed under Order VI Rule 17 and section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for permitting the plaintiff to add plot no.44 in the schedule of the plaint. Learned trial court has found that the said plot no.44 is recorded as gair majarua malik in the khatiyan and therefore, by adding this plot, the State of Bihar will become a necessary party to be added in the suit which will change the nature of the - 2 - suit. From the plaint it appears that the suit has been filed for permanent injunction against the defendants from obstructing the passage of the plaintiff as shown in the sketch map appended with the plaint. Learned counsel for the opposite parties submits that by adding this plot in the schedule, cause of action will change and altogether a new case will be set up by the plaintiff for which necessary pleadings against State of Bihar have to be made and the State of Bihar has to be added as party in the suit. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the order of learned court below, it is clear that the proposed amendment by the plaintiff in the plaint will change the nature of the suit and will amount to adding a new cause of action. In the circumstances, this Court finds that the trial court has rightly rejected the petition of the plaintiff and therefore, does not find any merit in this revision application. This revision application is accordingly dismissed. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh,J.)