IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.36 of 2009 SRIPAL SHARMA Versus SMT. RUCHI SINGH ----------- 2. 16.1.2009 Heard Mr. Raghubansh Singh, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the eviction suit filed by the plaintiff opposite party could not have been said to be barred in view of subsequent legislation seeking to amend Bihar Hindu Religious Trust Act, 1950. Admittedly by Act No.1 of 2007 such amendment was brought whereas the suit was filed prior to that. There is no dispute that there was no retrospectivity attached to such amendment. Therefore, the court below has not committed any jurisdictional error in rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for dismissing the suit as not maintainable before the civil court. The next submission of Sri Raghubansh Singh, learned Senior counsel, is that as a matter of fact the defendant petitioner was not even tenant so as to put him under rigors of eviction suit. This 2 aspect of the matter can only be gone into at the stage of trial of the suit. The unusual prayer of a tenant that the eviction suit should be expedited must be appreciated. Therefore, this Court would direct the court below to dispose of the eviction suit within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, provided the petitioner does not cause any delay in disposal of the suit. With the aforementioned observation, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/