IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.214 of 2010 1. MD. SHALKIN 2. MD. SHAHADAT 3. MD KAMRU ALL SONS OF MD. TOHID. 4. MOHAMMAD ANWAR S/O MOHAMMAD SHOEB 5. MOHAMMAD SHOUKAT S/O MOHAMMAD NASAR 6. MOHAMMAD OBAISH S/O MOHAMMAD SHOEB. ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KARI CHAK MASANPUR, P.S. BIRPUR (BARAUNI), PARGANA-MALKI, SUB-DIVISION, SUB-REGISTRY AND DISTRICT-BEGUSARAI Versus 1. MOHAMMAD MASOOD SON OF LATE MD. JAFIR. 2. MOHAMMAD RABBAN SON OF LATE MD. JAFIR 3. MOHAMMAD MANJOOR SON OF LATE MD. JAFIR 4. MOHAMMAD NOOR ALAM 5. BIBI JANNO BEGUM W/O LATE NOOR ALAM 6. MOHAMMAD PAPPU 7. MOHAMMAD RUNNU 8. MOHAMMAD JAHANGIR ALL S/O LATE NOOR ALAM 9. RUNNI DAUGHTER (MINOR) U/G OF HER MOTHER 10. SUNNI. BOTH DAUGHTGER OF LATE NOOR ALAM. ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-KAREE CHAK HASSANPUR, P.S. BIRPUR, DISTRICT-BEGUSARAI. -DEFENDANTS/OPPOSITE PARTIES. _____ For the Petitioners : M/s V. Nath & Sandip Singh 2 05.03.2010 The Office has raised question of maintainability by stating that by impugned order plaint has been returned to the plaintiffs under Order 7 Rule 10 to be presented in a Court of proper jurisdiction. Such order is 2 challengeable by preferring an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not contest the Stamp report and seeks permission to withdraw this Civil Revision to prefer an appeal before an appropriate forum. Permission is accorded. This Civil Revision is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to take any remedial step available under law. If such step is taken before an appropriate forum, it shall, while considering the prayer for condoning the delay, take into account the fact that the petitioners had earlier filed this Civil Revision before this Court. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) AAhmad