2025:JHHC:26616 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C. M. P. No.1097 of 2024 Brijesh Kumar Bajpai, S/o Late B. N. Bajpai, R/o H. No.484/A, situated at Kasidih Bustee, PO- Sakchi and PS- Sakchi, Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. .... .. ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Jitendra Kumar Bajpai, S/o Late B. N. Bajpai, R/o Supervisors Flat, bearing Flat No.SA/ 59, Sakchi, PO and PS- Sakchi, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 2. Manju Bajpai (Deleted) 3. Nitesh Kumar Bajpai, S/o Late Umesh Kumar Bajpai 4. Nishant Bajpai, S/o Late Umesh Kumar Bajpai, O.P. Nos.2 to 4 are R/o Qr. No.L/2-11, Kulshi Road, Sakchi, PO- Sakchi and PS- Sakchi, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 5. Rajesh Kumar Bajpai, S/o Late B. N. Bajpai, R/o House No.484/ A, situated at Kasidih Bustee, Sakchi, PO Sakchi, PS- Sakchi, District- East Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 6(i) Sourav Mishra, S/o Late Chandra Prakash Mishra, R/o House No.603, Gold Star Apartment, Brindaban, Sector-4, PO and PS- Brindaban, District- Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. 6(ii) Smt. Prativa Mishra, D/o Late Chandra Prakash Mishra and W/o Rakesh Kumar, R/o Flat No.413 M, DS Max Sparkle Nest, 28/1, Major Akshay Road, the Defence Enclave, Kathanur, Bengaluru, PO and PS- Kathanur, District- Bengaluru, Karnataka. 6(iii) Preeti Mishra, D/o Late Chandra Prakash Mishra 6(iv) Ankita Mishra, D/o Late Chandra Prakash Mishra 6(v) Kritika Mishra, D/o Late Chandra Prakash Mishra Sl. Nos.(iii) to (v) are R/o of House No.603, Gold Star Apartment, Brindaban, Sector-4, PO and PS- Brindaban, District- Lucknow, Utter Pradesh. 7.Smt. Asha Mishra, W/o Shri Amit Mishra, D/o Late B. N. Bajpai, R/o H. No.1/216, Ruchikhand, 1st, Sarda Nagar Yojna, PO and PS- Ruchikhand, District- Lucknow. .. ... ...Opp. Party(s) ........... CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ......... For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate M/s Puja Agarwal, Advocate For the O. P(s). 1, 3, 4, 5 & 7 : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate Mr. Shivam Singh, Advocate Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate …... 08/ 01.09.2025. Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 1. Petitioner/ defendant has filed the instant CMP under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 19.08.2024 passed by learned Civil Judge, Sr. Div.-I, Jamshedpur in Original Title (P) Suit No.03 of 2012 whereby and whereunder, the petition dated 12.06.2024 filed on behalf of Opp. Party Nos.1 to 5/ plaintiffs 2025:JHHC:26616 under Order VI Rule 17 read with Section 151 CPC has been allowed. 2. Defendant/ petitioner had earlier filed a petition to include certain properties situated in the State of Uttar Pradesh in the schedule of the plaint for partition claiming the same to be the joint family property and the said petition for amendment was allowed vide order dated 22.05.2024. 3. As a sequel to this amendment, the plaintiff(s) filed an amendment petition in the plaint at Para-9 to incorporate the following amendment, which has been allowed :- 9(A) – That the plaintiffs have not included the landed properties of native place of the plaintiffs situated at Village- Ibrahimpur, Tehsil- Lalganj, District- Raiberali, UP as the same are outside the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court and also outside of the State and there are other Co-sharers in the landed Properties of Uttar Pradesh, who are living there, who have no right, title, interest or share in the suit property. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that since the part of the suit property lies within the territorial jurisdiction of Civil Court, Jamshedpur, therefore inclusion of joint family property situated at Uttar Pradesh, does not oust the jurisdiction of the Trial Court. Therefore, the proposed amendment was unnecessary and uncalled for. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any merit in the instant CMP. 6. The proposed amendment is merely clarificatory and is not an insertion of new fact. In a Partition Suit, the matter for determination was, whether there was status of jointness of the party(s) and the schedule properties were the joint family property or not. 7. On the petition filed by the defendant/ petitioner, the property in the State of Uttar Pradesh has already been included and adjudication will take place regarding the status of jointness with respect to it. Therefore, the present amendment is not going to in any way change the nature of suit or amounts to withdrawal of any admission on the part of the plaintiff. 8. Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of. Sandeep/- (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)