Order This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 25.8.2008 passed by learned Subordinate Judge-VII, Deoghar in Title Suit No. 28 of 2000 rejecting the additional written statement, filed on behalf of the petitioner. 2. Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the additional written statement has been rejected only on the ground that no leave was taken for filing additional written statement under Order VIII Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3. Ordinarily, the additional written statement could be accepted. However, 'when I examined the amendment sought for by the plaintiff, it appears that the plaintiff sought to add Bhagirath Bhaiya (respondent no. 3) as defendant in the suit saying that the petitioner has sold the suit property during the pendency of the suit to Mr. Bhagirath Bhaiya; and challenged such sale and claimed injunction against such purchaser. No further fact was stated. 4. It further appears from the additional written statement filed on behalf of the petitioner that in paragraph 4 it was clearly said that so far as the proposed amendment is concerned, a detailed reply by way of written statement has already been filed by the defendant no. 3 namely Bhagirath Bhaiya on 30.5.2005 as purchaser of the said property. 5. Naturally, on the basis of such pleadings proper issues are to be framed in the suit, if not already framed. Additional written statement is in the nature of submissions and arguments on behalf of the petitioner to the amendment of the plaint which can be advanced at the time of hearing. 6. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of my supervisory jurisdiction and under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of.