IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1705 of 2008 RANJAY KUMAR UPADHYAY Versus MADHAV UPADHYAY & ORS ----------- 3 10/11/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner in the matter of limitation (I.A.No. 6146 of 2008). For the reasons mentioned in the aforementioned application, the delay in filing this civil revision application is condoned. On merits, this Court would not find any error in the impugned order, in as much as, the court below has gone into the issue and has found that the proposed addition of Durgabati Devi in a probate case was necessary, in as much as, Bank account and the deed of gift had shown her definite interest in the estate of deceased. That apart, reliance placed by counsel for the petitioner on the affidavit disowning or denying any interest in the matter in dispute is actually a matter of evidence and for that reason the court below could not have rejected the application seeking her impleadment. 2 That being so, this Court does not find any error in the impugned order. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. ) Abhay Kumar