Patna High CourtCWJC/17058/2013allowed

Arun Pandey v. Sri Ganga Thakur And ORS

2017-12-15Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17058 of 2013 ======================================================

1. Arun Pandey S/O Late Amir Pandey Resident Of Village- Rampur Dayal, P.S- Piyar (Sakra), District- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Sri Ganga Thakur S/O Sri Moti Thakur Resident Of Village- Rampur Dayal, P.S- Piyar (Sakra), District- Muzaffarpur.

2. Sri Ram Balihari Thakur S/O Late Madho Thakur Resident Of VillageRampur Dayal, P.S- Piyar (Sakra), District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-12-2017 This writ application has been filed to quash the order dated 23.05.2013 passed by learned Special Execution Munsif, Muzaffarur in Title Suit No.54 of 2007 whereby and whereunder the court below allowed the petition filed by the defendantsrespondents for amendment in the written statement.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

3. It appears that the amendment petition was filed on behalf of respondent on 26.09.2012 praying therein to add certain facts at the end of paragraph 7 of the written statement. The facts to be added are as follows:- "It is submitted that Nunwati alias Nunua Hajamin sold 8 dhurs of land to Madho Thakur out of above 27 dec. through sale deed dated

Patna High Court CWJC No.17058 of 2013 (4) dt.15-12-2017 27/10/1943, whereas the sale deed propounded by the deft. was executed on 25/5/1944 by said Nunwati."

4. Besides that the respondent wants to insert the words "West and North" in 6th line of paragraph 8 and delete some figures from paragraph 15 of the written statement. These amendments are simple in nature, which do not prejudice the plaintiff-petitioner in any way and so the court below has not committed any jurisdictional error in allowing the amendment petition filed by the defendant.

5. In view of above facts and circumstances, I do not find any merit in the application. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed.

(Sanjay Kumar, J) Harish/- U