IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1689 of 2006 RAVINDRA NATH SINGH, son of Sri Ramslok Singh, resident of Village and P.O. Naini, P.S. Chapra, Distt. Chapra, presently residing at Mohalla – Bagraj Khan, P.S. and Distt. Hajipur ………Plaintiff/Petitioner Versus 1. RAKESH KANAN, 2. Santosh Kanan, 3. Atul Kanan, all sons of late Motilal Sinha Kanan, All residents of Mohalla – Bagtaj Khan alias Pokhra, P.S., Town and P.O. Hajipur, Distt. Vaishali at Hajipur….Defendant 1st Party…………………………Opposite 1st Party, 4. Smt. Manju Singh, wife of Sri Krishna Chand Prasad Singh, resident of Mohalla – Anwarpur, P.S. Hajipur Town, P.O. and District – Hajipur, and 5. Janki Devi, wife of Ravindra Nath Singh, resident of Mohalla – Bagtaj Khan, P.S., Town – Hajipur, Distt. Vaishali at Hajipur………………Plaintiff…..Opposite 3rd Party. ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. T.N. Maitin and Mr. Ramadhar Singh, Advocates. ****** 2. 24.02.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The plaintiff – petitioner is aggrieved by the order 30.06.2006, passed by the Sub Judge IX, Vaishali at Hajipur in Title Suit No. 148 of 1997, whereby plaintiff’s petition dated 28.04.2006, as contained in Annexure-1 to this application, has been rejected. The trial court, after hearing the parties, had come to the conclusion that the defendants were not ready to choose any option offered by the plaintiff for settlement and - 2 - the case was posted for hearing of final submissions on behalf of the parties, thus, as there was no scope of settlement between the parties and no purpose would be solved by appointment of a Pleader Commissioner. As a result, it had dismissed the aforesaid petition filed by plaintiff. I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order. This Civil Revision is dismissed. dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )