2025:JHHC:25527 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 111 of 2025 Pradeep Kumar Burman, S/o Late Naheshwar Saw Swarnkar, R/o village- Bantara, P.O. & P.S.-Gola, District-Ramgarh ..... .... Petitioner Versus 1. Chatrubhuj Kashyap, S/o Daneshwar Mahto 2. Mamta Kumari Singh, W/o Chatrubhuj Kashyap Both resident of Bariyatu Road, P.O. P.S.-Gola, District-Ramgarh 3. Parvej Shahjad, S/o Mohammed Allauddin, R/o Church Road, P.O. & P.S.- Lower Bazar, District-Ranchi 4. Md. Feroj, S/o Md. Zakir Hussain, R/o Bantara, P.O. & P.S.-Gola, District- Ramgarh 5. Md. Minhajul Islam, S/o Late Md. Ali Bux, R/o Bantara, P.O. & P.S.-Gola, District-Ramgarh 6. Shiba Rajwar 7. Gaurav Rajwar Both sons of Hardu Rajwar, R/o Village-Dabhatu, P.O.- Kumhardaga, P.S. Gola, District-Ramgarh … …. Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Ramchander Sahu, Advocate Mr. Om Prakash Singh, Advocate For the O.P. 1 to 4 : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Aditya Banerjee, Advocate Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate For the O.P. 6 & 7 : Ms. Savita Kumari, Advocate ------ Order No. 11 / Dated : 26.08.2025. 1. The petitioner is the plaintiff and is aggrieved by the order dated 16.01.2019 passed in Title Suit No. 90/2013 by which a petition seeking change in the date as reflected in the petition under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC filed on behalf of the plaintiff/petitioner dated 17.09.2018 has been rejected. 2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC was formal in nature by making correction in the date, which was typographical. The Trial Court has rejected that petition without assigning any reason for the same. 3. Learned counsel for the defendants/opposite party nos. 1 to 4 has submitted that the order is of the year 2019, whereas the present civil misc. petition has been filed in 2025. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for opposite party nos. 6 and 7 submits that defendant/opposite party no. 6 has died during pendency of this civil misc. 2025:JHHC:25527 petition. 5. Having considered the submissions, advanced on behalf of both sides, it is rather very strange that a correction in the date in a petition filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC has been rejected without assigning any reason for the same. 6. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The Trial Court is directed to pass the order afresh. 7. This civil misc. petition stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/ -