IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.205 of 2002 1. SMT. BIMLA DEVI, WIDOW OF LATE PRABHU CHAND JAIN 2. DR. BIKAS CHANDRA JAIN 3. UMESH CHANDRA JAIN BOTH SONS OF LATE PRABHASH CHAND JAIN, ALL RESIDENTS OF MOHALLA MAHAJAN TOLI NO.2 ARRAH, P.S. ARRAH TOWN, DISTRICT BHOJPUR. …..DEFENDANTS 2ND SET-APPELLANTS-APPELLANTS- PETITIONERS. Versus 1(i) ARUN KUMAR 1(ii) SURAJ KUMAR 1(iii) AJAY KUMAR ALL SONS OF LATE BHUVANESHWAR PRASAD SAH, RESIDENT OF LAKSHMANJI, BASUDEO JI JWELLERS KHIDIPUR, BABU BAZAR, BHUKAILASH CALCUTTA (WEST BENGAL). 2. LAKSHMAN PD. SAH 3. BASUDEV PRASAD SAH 4. SHAMBHU NATH SAH 5. RAMJI SAH NOS.2 TO 5 ARE SONS OF LATE RAGHUBAR DAYAL SAH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA MILKI ARAH, P.S. ARRAH TOWN, DISTRICT BHOJPUR. ………PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS 1ST SET-RESPONDENTS 1ST SET-OPPOSITE PARTY 1ST SET. 6. SRI 108 SRI ANSH NATH BHAGWAN TRUST THROUGH THE ALLEGED PRESENT SECRETARY, SRI SURAJ KUMAR JAIN, THE SAID SRI SURAJ KUMAR JAIN RESIDING IN MOHALLA MAHAJAN TOLI NO.1 ARA, P.O. & P.S. ARA TOWN, DISTRICT BHOJPUR ……..DEFENDANT NO.1-RESPONDENT 2ND SET- RESPONDENT 2ND SET-OPPOSITE PARTY 2ND SET. 7. PRESIDENT OF BIHAR STATE BOARD, DIGAMBAR JAIN RELIGIOUS TRUST, HAZARIBAGH, P.O. & P.S. HAZARIBAGH, DISTRICT HAZARIBAGH …….DEFENDANT NO.1(KA)-RESPONDENT 3RD SET- RESPONDENT 3RD SET-OPPOSITE PARTY 3RD SET. 8. SRI SUBHASH CHANDRA JAIN 9. SRI JUGESH CHANDRA JAIN SONS OF LATE PRABHASH CHAND JAIN, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA MAHAJAN TOLI NO.2, ARRAH, P.S. ARRAH TOWN, DISTRICT BHOJPUR ……..DEFENDANT 2ND SET-RESPONDENT 4TH SET- RESPONDENT 4TH SET-OPPOSITE PARTY 4TH SET. ----------- - 2 - 19/ 07.01.2011 This review petition has stood dismissed against the heirs of deceased opposite party no.2 vide order dated 30.07.2010. This petition has been filed for review of judgment dated 24.11.1999 by which a Bench of this court dismissed S.A. No.113 of 1995 which was filed by the petitioner against the concurrent findings of both the courts below decreeing the suit filed for eviction against the petitioner and for other reliefs. This court does not find any error apparent on the face of judgment under review nor does it find any material to take a different view. Accordingly, this civil review petition is dismissed. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)