IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1719 of 2008 SURYADEO SINGH Versus CHANDRAMA SINGH @ NATHUNI SINGH With C.R. No.1720 of 2008 SURYADEO SINGH Versus CHANDRAMA SINGH @ NATHUNI SINGH ----------- 2 17.10.2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioner. The apprehension of Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order would now cause further delay in disposal of the both the miscellaneous cases of the year 1992 inasmuch as after the admission of the case, once again notices will have to be issued, seems to be misconceived inasmuch as if the opposite party has already appeared, there would be no question for fresh issuance of notice. That apart, once the petitioner himself had filed an application under Section 5 r/w Section 14 of the Limitation Act, the inclination of the Court below to pass an order on the same before entertaining the two miscellaneous cases, call it by name of admission or hearing, cannot be said to suffering from any jurisdictional error. Accordingly, both the civil revision applications, being misconceived, are hereby dismissed with a 2 direction to the Court below to ensure that both the miscellaneous cases of the year 1992 are decided expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)