IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.261 of 2010 MOHAN PRASAD TIKMANI son of Late Ram Vilas Prasad Tikmani, resident of Village and PS Runni Saidpur District Sitamarhi ....Petitioner/Appellant Versus 1. SENIOR DIVISIONAL RETAIL SALES MANAGER, I O C LTD. (Marketing Division) Maurya Lok Complex, Patna 2. Divisional Retail Manager, IOC Ltd. Krishna Complex, Akhora Ghat Road, Muzaffarpur 3. Sales Officer, Area, India Oil Corporation Ltd. Mandal Office at Krishna Complex, Akhora Ghat Road, Muzaffarpur 4. Satyanarain Prasad Tikmani, son of Sukhdeo Prasad Tikmani, resident of village and PS Runni Saidpur District Sitamarhi ......Respondents/Respondents ----------- 02- 4/2/2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for respondent no.4. It appears that the appellant got the dealership of diesel, whereas his uncle got the dealership of kerosene oil. There was some family arrangement pursuant to which the appellant began to control and run the business of kerosene oil, whereas the private respondent controlled the business of petrol pump. It appears that the dispute in the family persisted which led to the filing of the Partition Suit. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the partition suit the learned trial court directed for maintaining the status quo which existed prior to making of the working arrangement, i.e. 23.1.84. It further appears that Title Partition Appeal was filed against 2 the order of the trial court. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised the grievance that despite the order of the trial court, the same is not being implemented by the respondent – Indian Oil Corporation. 2. In our view, if the appellant has any grievance, he should agitate the issue before the court concerned. This appeal is disposed of accordingly. ( S K Katriar ) ( S P Singh ) mrl