IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Revision No.299 of 2009 Abdul Hafiz Versus Saliman Khatoon@Saliman Bibi& Ors. ---------------------------------- 8. 13.12.2011 Heard Mr. Nagendra Rai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 1 to 5, upon whom notices have been validly served. By the impugned order the Court below has allowed the prayer of the opposite party 1st Set for setting aside the ex parte decree and has thereby restored the suit to its original file and number. From the perusal of the impugned order it appears that the finding of fact has been recorded regarding non-service of summons upon the defendant Nos. 6 and 7 with regard to date of hearing of the suit as well as after the amendment was made in the plaint. After perusing the impugned order and considering the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, it appears that the matter has arisen out of a suit for partition which is said to have been filed in the year 1989. In view of the finding of the fact recorded by 2 the learned Court below in the impugned order, there is no scope for interference in the same in this revision application. However, the learned Court below is directed to take up the proceeding of the suit expeditiously and preferably dispose it of within one year from the date of receipt/production of this order. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff/petitioner has assured this Court that the plaintiffs will fully co-operate with the proceeding of the suit and will not take unnecessary adjournment. This revision application is accordingly dismissed with the aforesaid directions and observations. Saif/- (V. Nath, J.)