IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.443 of 2009 SWATI PANDE & ORS Versus SMT.KUMUD SAHU CHOUDHARY & ORS ----------- 3 16/4/2009 Heard both sides. By the impugned order dated 18.3.2009 passed in CWJC. No.3277 of 2009, the learned Single Judge directed to evict the appellant and put the writ petitioner – respondent no.1 back in possession of plot no.252 in Patliputra Housing Colony but it is also observed as follows: “It will be, however, open for the private respondent nos.3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 to seek modification of the said interim order after they appear and file counter affidavit.” Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in view of the direction, appeal is not maintainable especially because in pursuance of the above observation, he filed an application for modification of the interim order and the date has been fixed on the application for modification. Without going into the merits of the case, we are disposing of this appeal with observation that if both - 2 - sides have appeared before the learned Single Judge and the date is fixed on the application for modification of the interim order, the learned Single Judge may pass a fresh order after hearing both sides before evicting the appellant as before passing an order of eviction against the appellant, the appellant ought to be heard. Meanwhile, appellant shall not be evicted. Let a copy of this order be given to the counsel for the parties. Neyaz/- (J. B. Koshy, CJ.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)