IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15759 of 2011 Pradip Kumar Versus Shmabhu Nath Sikaria & Anr ---------------------------------- 02. 20.09.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 03.08.2011 passed by Sub Judge I, Motihari in title suit no.255 of 1984. From the impugned order, it appears that considering the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent no.2, the learned Court below directed both the parties to appear before the Court on 08.08.2011. But instead of appearing before the Court below, the petitioner insisted the Court below to register the case. It also appears that the petitioner, instead of obeying the order passed by the Court below is trying to overreach the process of the Court. It is well settled principles of law as has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in 2010(8) S.C.C. 329 that the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is discretionary and no person can claim as a matter of right. It is also well settled that a person who is trying to defy the order of the competent court can not be allowed to invoke this jurisdiction. He cannot insist the Court to move according to his choice. 2 Considering the fact that the petitioner who is trying to give pressure to the Court and to overreach the process of Court and he himself prayed before the Court to reject his application so that he may apply to the High Court, impugned order has been passed. I, therefore, find no merit in this writ application and accordingly, it is dismissed. The Court below shall proceed according to law. Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)