JUDGMENT :

The instant civil miscellaneous petition has been preferred by petitioners/plaintiffs for quashing the impugned order dated 03.02.2023 passed in Title Suit No.64 of 2021 by Civil Judge (S.D.) VII, Hazaribagh, whereby and whereunder the application dated 17.11.2022(Annexure-4) filed under order 6 rule 17 of CPC on behalf of plaintiffs has been dismissed.

2. plaintiffs/petitioners have instituted Title Suit No.64 of 2021 claiming relief(s) for declaration of right, title interest over the suit property which the defendants forcibly occupied and illegally dispossessed the plaintiffs and also for recovery of possession coupled with injunction restraining the defendants from raising any construction over the suit land.

3. According to the plaintiffs, the suit property pertaining to Khata No.25, plot No.121 area 8 decimals of land situated in village Masirpirhi District Hazaribagh was purchased by plaintiff No.1 from one Smt. Sudama Sinha wife of Ramjatan Singh through registered sale deed dated 12.11.2018 for valuable consideration amount of Rs.8 lakhs(Rs. Eight lakhs).

4. It is alleged that the vendor of the plaintiffs Smt. Sudama Sinha has purchased the said land from one Smt. Rita Lal wife of Pramodh Bihari Lal vide registered Sale Deed No. 15336 dated 18.10.2000. After purchase of the said land, she got mutated the land and correction slip and rent receipt was also issued in her favour along with the land possession certificate issued by Circle Officer, Sadar Bazar Hazaribagh. It is averred that the defendants being men of muscles power forcibly, dispossessed the plaintiffs from the suit land by dividing it into two parts and northern part has been occupied by defendant No.2 and southern part by defendant No.1.

5. The defendant/respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared in the suit and filed their respective written statement on 30.05.2022 denying claim of plaintiffs over the suit property. It is pleaded that the defendants have purchased 6 decimals of land out of total 8 decimals of land of suit scheduled property through registered Sale Deed No.1354/1319 dated 03.03.2016 and defendant No.2 claimed to have purchased 5 decimals of land forming part of plot No.121 from Smt. Pratima Singh vide registered Sale Deed No.1353/1318 dated 03.03.2016. The defendants have also denied the right, title interest of the vendors of plaintiffs.

6. In order to meet out the points raised in the written statement, the plaintiffs have filed application under order 6 rule 17 of CPC stating that due to inadvertence and over sight, they omitted to state the facts as to how their vendor Ritlan had acquired title and possession over the suit land and as such it become necessary to amend the plaint to clarify and explain by way of amendment to counter the facts raised in the written statement of defendants

Proposed amendment is as follows:-

A. That after para 11 of the plaint sub paras 11(a)(b) and (c) be added as follows:-

11(a) “That Sohar Mahto took raiyati settlement of 87 decimal of land of plot No-121 for the Ex-land lord and came in possession upon the same. The said settleee Sohar Mahto died leaving behind a son Govrdhan Mahto, who sold and transferred the said land in favour of satyendra Prasad Sinha by virtue of registered sale deed dated 05.10.59 and put him possession upon the same.

11(b) That Satyendra Prasad Sinha died leaving behind two sons namely Sunil Sinha and Sanjay Sinha and a daughter namely Sangita Devi, who came in joint possession upon the said 87 decimal of land besides other land left behind Satyendra Sinha. After death of Satyendra Sinha Sanjay Sinha being need of money for legal necessities of the joint family and with consent of his brother and sister, sold and transferred the said 87 decimal of land in favour of Pramodh Bihar Lal vide registered sale deed dated 14/6/88 for a valuable consideration and put him in possession upon the same. After death of Pramodh Bihar Lal his wife Rita Lal sold and transferred 8 decimal of land out of