IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.692 of 2010 JUBAIDA KHATOON, WIFE OF LATE MD. ABDUL RAUF, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-GHUGHARITAR, P.S. CIVIL LINE, TOWN AND DISTRICT-GAYA……PLAINTIFF…PETITIONER. Versus RAM CHANDRA KEWAT, SON OF LATE KAILU MALLAH, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA-BAITARNI TALAB, P.S. CIVIL LINES, TOWN AND DISTRICT-GAYA, AT PRESENT- MOHALLA-GHUGHARITAR, P.S. CIVIL LINES, TOWN AND DISTRICT-GAYA…………DEFENDANT….OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar, Advocate. ----------- 2. 5.8.2010. The office has raised objection that the concerned suit having been dismissed on a petition filed under Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure holding that the same would not be maintainable under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982, would amount to a decree under Section 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, thus, remedy available against such decision would be an appeal before an appropriate court. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not contest the stamp report as a Bench of this Court in Brahmdeo Prasad Vs. Baldeo Prasad and others, reported in 1998(3) PLJR 486, has already decided the issue that the suit having been dismissed 2 on a preliminary issue under Order XIV Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the same would amount to a final adjudication between the parties and will be covered under the definition of a decree as provided under Section 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the above view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this Civil Revision to prefer an appeal before the competent court. Permission is accorded. This Civil Revision is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to seek remedy by preferring an appropriate appeal before a competent court. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)