IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9873 of 2010 1. Devendra Sharma S/O Late Chandradeo Singh R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pargana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 2. Veena Devi @ Veenda Devi W/O Ram Pravesh Sharma R/O Lakhasambhi, P.O.- Saren, P.S.- Nakhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 3. Ramaki Devi W/O Suresh Sharma R/O Banolia, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 4. Gulesh Devi W/O Rajeshwari Sharma R/O Bhimpura, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 5. Kamlesh Kumari @ Janki Devi W/O Birendra Sharma R/O Vill.- Dadar, P.S.- Goh, Distt.- Gaya Versus 1. Sita Ram Singh S/O Late Ram Krit Singh R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pragana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 2. Sanjay Sharma S/O Late Sita Ram Sharma R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pragana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 3. Subodh Sharma S/O Late Sita Ram Sharma R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pragana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 4. Kiran Devi W/O Late Shambhu Sharma R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pragana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 5. Chandan Kumar S/O Late Shambhu Sharma R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pragana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 6. Khusbu Kumari D/O Late Shambhu Sharma R/O Vill.- Katrasin, P.O.- Chhatiana, Pragana- Okari, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt.- Jehanabad 7. The Registrar, Judgeship Of Jehanabad, Town, At, P.O., P.S., Distt.- Jehanabad ----------- 2. 26.7.2011. Heard Mr. Devendra Prasad Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 16.3.2010 passed in Title Suit No.77 of 1992, whereby the prayer of the petitioner for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner for the second time has been refused. 2 A perusal of the order passed by the learned court below shows that on prayer made by the petitioner, an Advocate Commissioner had been appointed and who submitted his report on 24.5.2005. On an objection raised by the petitioner challenging the veracity of the report, the learned court below while disposing of the objection, has held that the same would be considered at the stage of hearing. Not being satisfied, a third petition was filed by the petitioner reiterating his prayer for appointment of a second Advocate Commissioner on 16.7.2007 and which has been rejected by the impugned order in the light of the order dated 14.11.2006 passed by the court below. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the order of the learned court below, I find no infirmity in the same inasmuch as the learned court below in its order dated 14.11.2006 has observed that the objection raised by the petitioner would be considered at the stage of hearing. With the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)