IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1061 of 2008 SUKHDEO PANDIT Versus RAJENDRA RAI@RAJENDRA YADAV&ORS ----------- 3. 8.8.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the grievance of the petitioner with regard to impleadment of Rajendra Rai as a co- petitioner in an application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. filed by Ramkaran Rai seems to be wholly misconceived when it is an admitted fact that the suit was decreed ex- parte both against Ramkaran Rai and Rajendra Rai. Accordingly, the impugned order cannot be said to be vitiated any jurisdictional error. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that it is only a delaying tactics being adopted by Ramkaran Rai and Rajendra Rai that a miscellaneous case filed under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. has been kept pending for long and in this way the plaintiff petitioner is the only sufferer. The court below is directed to ensure that miscellaneous case filed by Ramkaran Rai must be taken up expeditiously and disposed of within a period of three 2 months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations, this civil revision application is dismissed. ( Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/