IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.410 of 2008 SUBHASH KUMAR SUMAN Versus BHUPENDRA YADAV ----------- 2. 21.7.2010. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. This civil revision application is directed against the order dated 7.1.208 passed in Title Suit No.16 of 2006, whereby the trial court, while allowing the withdrawal of the suit, has refused permission to the plaintiff for institution of a fresh suit. Learned counsel for the petitioner, with reference to the provision as present under Order 23 Rule 1(3), submits that the provision itself enables the court to grant permission for institution of a fresh suit subject to its satisfaction. From perusal of the material on record, I find that a petition was filed in the title suit for adding P.W.D. Madhepura as well as the Zila Parishad, Madhepura as party to the suit and which was rejected by the trial court by order dated 3.12.2007. The plaintiff-petitioner never took any step for challenging the said order and which became final and binding upon the petitioner. Apparently it was with a view to over come this situation arising from the defect of parties 2 due to non joinder of P.W.D., Madhepura and Zila Parishad, Madhepura, that the petitioner sought permission of the trial court to withdraw the suit with a view to file a fresh suit after removing the defect of non joinder of necessary parties as also admitted in paragraph 9 of the application and which has rightly been disallowed by the impugned order dated 7.1.2008. I thus find no error in the impugned order. The contention advanced is misconceived and merits no consideration. Consequently, the civil revision application is dismissed. ahk (Jyoti Saran, J.)