IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.609 of 2009 KRISHNA SINGH Versus HARBANSH SINGH & ORS ----------- 3 21.05.2009 This case has been listed under the heading “To Be Mentioned” at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He points out that in the order dated 17.04.2009 in the second paragraph while giving the description of the learned court below “District Judge, Gaya” has been mentioned whereas it should be “District Judge, Patna”. He also points out that the revision application was filed by the defendant-petitioner and, therefore, the word “plaintiff” mentioned on the second page in the third line as well as in last paragraph of the order should be read as “defendant”. The order dated 17.4.2009 is corrected and it is held that the description of the court in the fourth line of second paragraph should be read as “District Judge, Patna” and the word “plaintiff” mentioned on the second page of the order at three places should be read as “defendant” instead of “plaintiff”. The order stands modified accordingly. Arvind/ (J.N Singh, J)