Patna High CourtCWJC/11592/2012allowed

Raj Kumar Kewat And ANR v. Panma Devi And ORS

2016-08-12Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar Trivedi1 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.11592 of 2012 (5) dt.12-08-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11592 of 2012 ======================================================

1. Raj Kumar Kewat Son Of Late Ganga Mallah Resident Of VillageRamhari Pind, P.S. Rajgir, District- Nalanda

2. Mithilesh Kumar Son Of Raj Kumar Kewat (Minor) Under The Guardianship Of His Father And Natural Guardian Who Has Adverse Interest In His Interest Resident Of Village- Ramhari Pind, P.S. Rajgir, District- Nalanda.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Panma Devi Daughter Of Ram Nandan Kewat Alias Gulhan Kewat, Wife Of Balchand Kewat Resident Of Village- Mogal Bigha, P.S.- Masaurhi, District Patna. Presently Residing Village- Ramhari Pind, P.S. Rajgir, District- Nalanda

2. Sabita Devi Daughter Of Ram Nandan Kewat Alias Gulhan Kewat, Wife Of Deo Charan Kewat Resident Of Village- Bakra, P.S.- Giriyak, District Nalanda. Presently Residing Village- Ramhari Pind, P.S. Rajgir, District- Nalanda .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 12-08-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the respondents. Gone through the order impugned in consonance with the proposed amendment (Annexure-1).

After going through the contents of Annexure-1, it is evident that only nomenclature of the document has been sought for to be changed in place of gift, sale deed. That being so, such nomenclature, if allowed is not going to change the basic feature of the suit. Consequent thereupon, is allowed whereupon, the order of the learned lower court is set aside. Petition is allowed to cost of Rs.5000/- which should be paid within four weeks with a further liberty to the defendant to have an opportunity in rebuttle. (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.) PN/- U