IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1966 of 2006 1. ANJU VERMA, D/O RAM AYODHYA PRASAD, W/O ASHOK KUMAR VERMA. 2. ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, SON OF RAM AWTAR PRASAD. 3. ANJALI SHRIVASTAVA, D/O RAM AYODHYA PRASAD, W/O RADHA RAMAN PRASAD. 4. RADHA RAMAN PRASAD, SON OF LATE RAM BARAN LAL, ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PATWARA, P.O. PATWARA, P.S. MUFFASIL, MOTIHARI, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. KANTI PRASAD, SON OF BHAGWAT LAL. 3. AJIT KUMAR 4. ARBIND KUMAR, BOTH SONS OF KANTI PRASAD. 5. PREM KUMAR 6. PRAVAKAR KUMAR 7. PRADIP KUMAR, ALL SONS OF VISHUDHAVA PRASAD. SL. NO.2 TO 7 ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PATWARA, P.O. PATWARA, P.S. MUFFASIL MOTIHARI, DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN. For the petitioner : M/s Ashok Jang Bahadur, Sunil Srivastava, Prakash Srivastava, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate. For private respondents : Mr. Surendra Pd. Singh, AC to AAG-I. ----------- 13. 03.02.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the State and the private respondents. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.10.2005, Annexure-4 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, East Champaran, Motihari in Misc. Appeal No.13 of 2005/04 of 2005, whereunder court below has affirmed the order dated 9.5.2005 passed by 8th Subordinate Judge, Motihari in Title Suit No.10 of 2000 refusing the prayer of the petitioners-plaintiffs for grant of injunction under order 39 Rule-1, 2 read with Section 151 CPC. While entertaining the instant writ petition this Court under orders dated 18.12.2006 restrained defendant nos.2 to 7 from felling the trees - 2 - standing over the lands in question as also from changing the nature of the suit lands. 3. Without going into the merit or otherwise of the impugned orders, taking into account the age of Title Suit No.10 of 2000 which was filed more than 10 years earlier, it is directed that the court below should proceed with the hearing of the suit on day to day basis and conclude the same, as early as possible, in any case within six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in the court below. It is made clear that in case parties do not cooperate in the early disposal of the suit, the court below should proceed ex parte. During the pendency of the suit both the parties are restrained from changing the nature of the lands in question as also from felling the trees planted over the lands in question. Defendants are also directed to furnish account of their earnings from the lands in question in the court below with effect from the date of institution of the suit. 3. Application stands disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)