Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:138065 Court No. - 9 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2640 of 2020 Petitioner :- Raja Ram Respondent :- Prem Chandra And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Prakash Chaudhary,Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- Adya Prasad Tewari,Vineet Kumar Singh Hon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 7.2.2020 filed by the Addl. District Judge, Court No.3, Gorakhpur in Civil Appeal No.77 of 2017 dismissing the application for amendment filed by the plaintiff in the suit. 3. Brief facts of the case are that Original Suit No.137 of 1988 was filed by the plaintiff-petitioner for cancellation of will dated 20.4.1981 executed by one Naresh who is brother of the petitioner, in favour of respondent no.1. One of the ground of challenge for cancellation of will was that Naresh died on 15.4.1981, therefore there was no question of executing the will on 20.4.1981. The factum of date of death was denied by the respondents and according to the defendants-respondents, Naresh died on 24.4.1981. After considering the evidence of the parties, the suit filed by the petitioner was dismissed. During pendency of the appeal against the decree dismissing the suit, an application for amendment was filed by the petitioner claiming amendment in the plaint which has been rejected by the court below. 4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the family register, date of death of Naresh was recorded as 15.4.1981 by the order dated 21.11.1983 passed by Assistant Development Officer, Panchayat. The said order dated 21.11.1983 was recalled on an appeal filed by the respondents by the order dated 8.10.1997. When the plaintiff-petitioner came to know about this order as the same was disclosed in the written statement, the petitioner moved a restoration application and the order dated 8.10.1997 was recalled. Thereafter, the appeal filed by the respondents was dismissed on 12.12.2007 in absence of the parties and the order has become final. The orders referred above were filed as an evidence before the court below but the court below ignoring the evidence filed by the plaintiff dismissed the suit. It has been further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner wanted to incorporate these pleading regarding the orders passed in the plaint but the same has not been allowed by the court below. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the evidence regarding orders has already been filed by the parties before the court below and question which has to be decided in appeal regarding date of death of Naresh is on the basis of evidence available on record. There is no requirement of making any amendment in the plaint for the said purpose. The appellate court has also rejected the amendment application of the petitioner on this ground. 6. In my view also, since the orders passed are already on record, there is no requirement of any amendment in the pleading for the same as the moot question to be decided is the date of death of deceased Naresh which will be decided by the court below on the basis of evidence filed by the parties. 7. In my view, no illegality has been committed by the court in passing the order impugned. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 S. Singh (Manish Kumar Nigam, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAVITA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad