This civil miscellaneous petition allows the petitioner's request for amendment to the written statement in a title suit, setting aside the sub-judge's order that rejected it as a jurisdictional error.
The order dated 19.11.2016 rejecting the amendment petition is set aside and the amendment petition is allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.1471 of 2016
======================================================
Rabindra Thakur Son of Late Rajeshwar Thakur, Resident of village- Saidpur, P.O. Lagunia, P.S. and Block- Patori, Dist- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
Mantun Jha Son of Late Ram Sharan Jha, Resident of Village- Saidpur, P.O. Laguniya, P.S.- Patori, Dist.- Samastipur.
... ... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dhananjai Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr. ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
3 30-11-2018
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Nobody appears on behalf of the sole respondent although the sole respondent received notice.
Petitioner is the defendant. The petitioner has filed this civil miscellaneous petition against the order dated 19.11.2016, passed by learned Sub-Judge-I, Samastipur in Title Suit No.334 of 2014 by which the learned Sub-Judge rejected the petition of the petitioner for amendment in WS.
Admittedly the plaintiff filed the evidence of one witness on affidavit after fixing the case for hearing but not a single witness of the plaintiff has been examined. The petitioner filed amendment stating some facts in order to make the case clear of the petitioner in WS. The amendment of WS shall be liberally considered than the amendment in the plaint as the
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1471 of 2016(3) dt.30-11-2018 2/2
defendant does not seek any relief but the learned court below has without any cogent reason rejected the petition of the petitioner for amendment of WS. The petitioner wanted to state the facts with regard to the lands of Plot No.224 and the litigation between the parties with regard to Plot No.224 as Title Suit No.855 of 2004 before the survey authority and Case No.856 of 2004 with regard to Plot No.223 thus, I find that the learned Sub-Judge has committed jurisdictional error in rejecting the petition of the petitioner for amendment of WS of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the order dated 19.11.2016, passed by learned Sub-Judge-I, Samastipur in Title Suit No.334 of 2014 is set aside. The petition of the petitioner for amendment of WS is allowed and this civil miscellaneous petition is accordingly allowed.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
S.KUMAR/-
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Sub-Judge committed a jurisdictional error in rejecting the petitioner's petition for amendment of written statement.
Whether amendments to a written statement should be liberally considered.
Rabindra Thakur
Mantun Jha
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
