THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED C.R.P.No.3524 of 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order, dated 02.06.2010, passed by the learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Anakapalli, allowing I.A.No.220 of 2009 in O.S.No.519 of 2002 filed under Order XXII Rule 4(4) Order VI Rule 17 and Section 151 CPC seeking to exempt the second respondent herein from filing the legal heir petition and include the word ‘Died’ at the end of the name of the first petitioner herein in the short and long cause title of the plaint. 2. The respondents/plaintiffs filed O.S.No.519 of 2002 for specific performance of an agreement of sale, dated 04.12.1998, executed by the first petitioner/first defendant in respect of the suit schedule property. In the said suit, the first petitioner/first defendant was set ex parte on 22.02.2003. The second petitioner herein, who is arrayed as second defendant, claimed that she is the adopted daughter of the first petitioner and has equal share in the suit schedule property. During the pendency of the suit, the first petitioner died on 26.06.2006. The second respondent filed I.A.No.220 of 2009 seeking to exempt him from filing the legal heir petition and include the word ‘Died’ at the end of the name of the first petitioner in short and long cause title. The trial Court allowed the said I.A. holding that the nature of the suit would not change if the petition is allowed. Aggrieved by the same, the second petitioner/second defendant filed this present revision petition. 3. Learned counsel for the second petitioner vehemently contended that the Court below should have seen that the second petitioner is the adopted daughter of the first petitioner and that she is entitled to her share in the suit schedule property. He further contended that that the suit document is a fabricated one. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the second petitioner and perused the material on record. 5. The second petitioner claims that she is the adopted daughter of the first petitioner, who was set ex parte on 22.02.2003 and who died on 26.06.2006. The questions as to whether the second petitioner is the adopted daughter of the first petitioner or not and is entitled to the share in the suit schedule property and the suit document is a fabricated one, cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 o the Constitution of India, as they are to be examined and determined by the trial Court after full-fledged trial. The trial court has rightly exempted the second respondent from filing legal heir petition on the ground that the first petitioner has no legal heirs to be brought on record and accordingly ordered that the word ‘Died’ be mentioned at the end of his name in the cause title. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this revision warranting interference by this Court. 6. Hence, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date:27.08.2010 sj