IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No. 129 of 2007 Bhanu Prasad son of Late Ram Gulam Sah, resident of Mohalla Khajanchi Road, P.S. Pirbahore, P.O. Bankipur, District & Town Patna …………..……Plaintiff-Opposite Party-Petitioner. Versus 1. Ravi Shankar Prasad son of Sri Bhanu Prasad Sah 2. Smt. Laxmi Devi Gupta wife of Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad, both residents of Mohalla Khajanchi Road, P.S. Pirbahore, P.O. Bankipur, District & Town Patna. ……………………………Defendants-Applicants-Opposite Parties. For the petitioner : Mr. Nirmal Kumar, Advocate. For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate. ----------- 03/ 02.07.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties. This petition has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff- opposite party-petitioner challenging order dated 16.12.2006 by which the learned Munsif-I, Patna allowed Misc. Case No.05 of 2002, which was filed by both the defendants-applicants-opposite parties under Order IX Rule 13 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex-parte decree dated 31.08.2002 passed in Title Suit No.08 of 2002, filed by the petitioner for declaration that the suit building was exclusively owned and possessed by him and the defendants, who were his son and daughter-in-law had no right, title or interest in the same. From the averments made by learned counsel for the parties as well as from the materials on record, including the impugned order of the learned court below it transpires that the learned court below while passing the impugned order had 2 considered the entire pleadings and evidence on record and only thereafter he had come to the conclusion that the defendants- applicants had been able to satisfy the court that summons were not duly served on them in the title suit and hence they were entitled to the reliefs as claimed by them. In the said 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. Since the title suit is of the year 2002 the trial court must take steps for its expeditious disposal. harish/ ( S.N.Hussain, J)