' This Constitutional petition calls in question order of the trial Court and the revisional order of the learned Additional District Judge whereby name of one of the defendants has been corrected.
' Muhammad Siddique plaintiff/respondent brought a suit for possession through pre-emption against three defendants who are all sons of Rahim Bakhsh. Defendant No,3 whose correct name is Safdar Ali was wrongly described as Zafar Ali in the plaint. Plaintiff made an application seeking correction of the name of the said defendant. Learned trial Court by order, dated 13-11-1985 allowed the application holding that it was only a case of misdescription through clerical mistake and not of addition of a new party. Revision taken by defendants has been dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, vide order, dated 6-1-1986. Learned Additional District Judge has maintained the order of the trial Court but added that 'the same shall stand subject to payment of costs of Rs,300 (three hundred)', as the respondent had sought the correction after considerable delay.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. View taken by the learned Courts below is not open to any exception. All the A three vendees who are brothers inter se were duly impleaded as defendants. No one was left out. Only the name of Safdar Ali vendee was written as Zafar Ali. This clearly was the result of clerical error which has been rightly corrected by the learned trial Court whose jurisdiction to make a necessary correction is not questioned. That being so, the impugned orders do not suffer from any legal infirmity or jurisdictional error. This petition has, therefore, no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.