HAKU MURMUR Vs. SUFAL MANJHI ALIAS SUFAL MURMUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the plaintiff -petitioner as well as the learned counsel for defendants -opposite parties 2nd set.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 8.6.2001 by which the learned Munsif, Sadar Purnea has rejected his petition for amendment of his plaint in Title Suit No. 763 of 1992.

(3.) HOWEVER , much later on 27.11.2000 the plaintiffs filed a petition (Annexure -1) for amendment of their plaint by way of adding a new paragraph 9 -A and a relief A -1 and four defendants in the plaint for challenging the ex -parte decree passed in Title Suit No. 1064/1960 against the father of the plaintiffs late Ganga Manjhi. They further claimed that earlier they had no knowledge or information of the said suit or the decree passed therein and for the first time on 25.11.2000 they learnt about the same when their lawyer saw the written statement. This amendment petition having been rejected by the impugned order, one of the plaintiffs has filed this civil revision.