IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL REVIEW No.344 of 2009 1. Kumar Satya Prakash 2. Binod Kumar Sharma Both sons of Jokhan sharma (deceased), all resident of village Saidpur, Dighwara, P.O. Dighwara, P.S. Dighwara, District Saran. …….Defendants-Appellants-Appellants-Petitioners. Versus 1. Sri Bharat Prasad Singh 2. Sri Shatrughan Prasad Singh Both sons of Shri Ramashish Singh, residents of village Barbanna, P.O. and P.S. Dighwara, District Saran. 3. Srimati Krishan Devi wife of Raghunath Sharma 4. Raghunandan Sharma 5. Trigunanad Sharma 6. Rajkishore Sharma All sons of Naval Sharma (deceased) 7. Smt. Lalita Devi wife of Shankar Sharma 8. Smt. Bidya Devi wife of Chhati Lal Sharma 9. Champa Devi wife of Hira Lal Sharma All daughters of Sukhdeo Sharma (deceased) At present residents of village Saidpur Dighwara, P.O. and P.S. Dighwara, District Saran. 10. Ram Sawari Devi wife of Ramchander Sharma 11. Umapati Devi wife of Jawahar Sharma Residents of Mohalla Dahiyawan Town Chapra, P.S. Town Chapra, P.O. Chapra, District Saran 12. Sheonandan Sharma son of Ram Avatar Sharma, Resident of village Saidpur, Dighwara, P.S. Dighwara, District Saran, at present No.34 Power House, Kachara Para District 24 Parna, E.F.W. No.54 First. 13. Ramdeo Sharma 14. Mohan Sharma Both sons of Gopal Mistri (deceased) 15. Dehari Sharma 16. Ram Ayodhya Sharma son of Chandeshwar Sharma(deceased) Resident of village Sardha Newazi Tola, P.S.Chapra, Mufasil, P.O. Sardha, District Saran. ……..Plaintiffs-Respondents-Respondents-Opposite parties. For the petitioners : Mr. Prabhakar Nath Rai, Advocate. For the opposite parties : None ----------- 04/ 16.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, who argued in detail. 2 This petition has been filed by the defendants-appellants- appellants-petitioners for review of order dated 05.03.2002 by which a Bench of this court dismissed S.A. No.123 of 1999 at the time of hearing of the second appeal under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The main question in issue was whether Roha Sharma died in the year 1957 as claimed by the plaintiffs or he died in the year 1941 as claimed by the defendants. The trial court as well as the lower appellate court considering the materials on record held that the said Roha Sharma had died in the year 1957. The said question being question of fact, regarding which there was a concurrent finding of both the courts below, the said second appeal was rightly dismissed as High Court cannot interfere with the concurrent findings of fact under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court does not find any error apparent on the face of the record, nor does it find any fresh material to take a different view. Accordingly, this civil review petition is dismissed. harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)