IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Revision No.2044 of 2008 Bisheshwar Singh Versus Abha Devi & Ors ---------------------------------- For the petitioner: M/S Subash Kishore Verma & Jogendra Kumar Singh For opposite party nos.1 & 5: Mr. Satyapal Singh For minor opposite party nos. 2& 3 as D.R.Guardian: Mr. Nityanand Mishra 9 15-9-2011 By the impugned order in this revision application Miscellaneous Case No. 27 of 2002 has been dismissed. The prayer in the said Miscellaneous Case was for restoration of Miscellaneous No. 2 of 1987. It is not disputed that Title Suit No. 184 of 1991 had been filed by the plaintiff-opposite parties and an ex- parte decree came to be passed in the said suit. The petitioner, who was one of the defendants in the said suit , thereafter filed a petition for setting aside the ex-parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. However, the said Miscellaneous Case No. 2 of 1987 had been dismissed against which an appeal was filed which was allowed and the matter was remanded back for fresh consideration with certain directions. Thereafter, due to default in compliance of the order of the court with regard to service of summons, the Miscellaneous Ca se came to be dismissed. It is not 2 necessary to enumerate in detail the different Miscellaneous Cases filed by the petitioner and the respective orders passed therein in view of the stand of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties to allow this revision application subject to payment of appropriate cost in order to compensate them for the expenses and harassment suffered due to apparent negligence of the petitioner. The stand of the learned counsel on behalf of the opposite parties appears to be very fair and justice oriented. It is by now well-settled that all efforts should be made to get the suit decided on merit instead of decision by default or ex-parte decision. The persistent attempt by the petitioner to get the suit decided on merits is apparent from filing of several Miscellaneous Cases by him and it would be in the interest of justice that a last chance should be given to the petitioner to get his Miscellaneous Case No. 2 of 1997 filed under Order 9 Rule 13C.P.C. adjudicated on merits. For the foregoing reasons, this revision application is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Miscellaneous Case No. 2 of 1997 is restored to its original file provided the petitioner complies with the order passed 3 by the court below with regard to issuance of notices and other miscellaneous matters promptly and without delay. This order will be subject to payment of cost of Rs.5000/- (five thousand) to the plaintiff-opposite parties within a period of one months from today and the petitioner must file the receipt showing payment of cost in the court below within the said period. As both the plaintiffs and the defendants being represented through their counsel are present before this Court and have undertaken to cooperate in the disposal of the matter in the court below without delay avoiding unnecessary adjournments, the learned court below is directed to expedite the hearing of Miscellaneous Case No. 2 of 1997 and dispose it of within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order roy ( V. Nath, J.)