IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1087 of 2009 1. Rambrichh Ravidas s/o late Barho Ravidas 2. Haro Manjhi s/o Mangru Manjhi 3. Gujar s/o Mangar Manjhi All resident of Village Dadaur,P.O. Krishna Nagar P.S. Mufassil Dist. Nawadah Plaintiffs-Petitioners Versus 1. Kamroodin Mian s/o Ramjan Mian 2. Munna Mian s/o Ramjan Mian Both resident of Mohalla Ansar Nagar P.S.Nawadah Dist. Nawadah 3. Jamuna Prasad Chauhan 4. Somar Chauhan 5. Noonu sons of late Khiru Chauhan 6. Rama Singh Yadav son of Dasrath Yadav 7. Sahdeo Yadav s/o Rachha Yadav 8. Ram Sharan Chauhan 9. Badri Chauhan 10. Dasrath Chauhan 11. Mithlesh Chauhan 12. Jadunandan Chauhan sons of Chauthi Chauhan 13. Sahdeo Paswan s/o Preayag Paswan 14. Rambriksh Paswan s/o Bishun Paswan 15. Baso Devi W/o late Saukhi Paswan 16. Pannu Paswan 17. Nandu Paswan both s/o late Saukhi Paswan 18. Sumshwar Paswan s/o Prayag Paswan All resident of Village Dadaur,P.O. Krishna Nagar P.S. Mufassil Dist. Nawadah 19. Mishri Singh s/o late Natho Ram 20. Ram Swroop Manjhi s/o late Siban Manjhi 21. Doman Ravidas s/o Mahavir Ravidas 22. Briajwa Devi w/o Kasho Ravidas 23. Kameshwar Manjhi s/o Karoo Manjhi 24. Sarjo Ravidas s/o Jhari Ravidas 25. Arjun Manjhi s/o Bando Manjhi 26. Baishakhi Manjhi s/o Degar Manjhi 27. Hari Manjhi s/o Karo Manjhi 28. Jagdish Manjhi s/o Degar Manjhi 29. Suraj Ravidas s/o Kesho Ravidas 30. Ram Dayal Manjhi s/o Bishun Dayal Manjhi 31. Roop Lal Manjhi s/o late Prbhoo Manjhi 32. Tunni Devi D/o late Prbhoo Manjhi 33. Kesho Manjhi s/o Karo Manjhi All resident of village Dadaur P.S. Mufassil Dist. Nawada Plaintiffs-Opposite Parties --------- For the petitioners: Mr Hans Raj, Advocate -------------- - 2 - 03 03.11.2009 This civil revision has been heard at this stage at the instance of the petitioners. 2. By the impugned order dated 20.05.2009 the learned Additional Munsif V, Nawada rejected the application filed by the remaining plaintiffs for deleting the names of plaintiff nos. 4,10 and 12 from the plaint of Title Suit No.22 of 1995. 3. The aforesaid suit was filed by the plaintiffs for declaration of title of all plaintiffs and also for declaration that revisional survey entry with respect to the suit land in the name of defendants was illegal and void and also for injunction as well as for other ancillary reliefs. The said suit was contested by the defendants who appeared and filed their written statement. 4. It transpires that on completion of pleadings, issues were framed and evidence of the parties were produced where after it was concluded and was closed. It further transpires that the arguments also started and the defendants closed their evidence where after arguments on behalf of the plaintiffs were also substantially completed when an application dated 16.05.2009 was filed by the plaintiffs for deleting the names of plaintiff nos. 4,10 and 12 stating that they have died, but in the said application neither their dates of deaths nor the dates of knowledge of the said deaths to the remaining plaintiffs were mentioned nor it was even stated as to whether they left behind any heir. 5. In the said circumstances the learned court below was quite justified in coming to the conclusion that the plaintiffs had filed - 3 - the said application at the fag end of the title suit when the arguments were being closed only to circumvent the effect of order of the High Court dated 25.06.2008 passed in C.R. no.592 of 2006 by which the suit was directed to be decided within one year and the said one year was going to conclude on 24.06.2009. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned order of the learned court below nor does it find any jurisdictional error therein. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. However, if the suit has not yet been decided, let it be decided without any further delay on the points involved in the case along with effect of the deaths of the said plaintiffs of the suit. shahid (S.N.Hussain, J)