IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.256 of 2009 DULHIN SHIV KUMARI DEVI W/O Baikunth Nath Ojha, R/O Vill. And P.O. Kharhatar, P.S. Simri, Distt. Buxar .......................Plaintiff-Appellant Versus 1.MOSTT.RAJMUNI KUER, W/O Late Baliram Dubey 2.MOSTT. SAROJ KUER ,W/O LATE Devendra Kumar Dubey Both R/O Vill. Dubauli, P.O. Ekona, P.S. Simari, Distt. Buxar (presently R/O Mani LalChaterjee Lane, Bichai talla, Bari no. 35, Distt. Howrah-3 (West Bengal) 3.BARHMESHWAR SINGH, S/O SriLaxman Singh, R/O Vill. Lahna, P.O. Chakki, P.S. Simari, Distt. Buxar. 4.SUMER YADAV, S/O Late Maksudan Yadav, R/O Vill. Lakna Chakki (Bhola Dere) P.O. Chakki, P.S. Brahmpur, Distt. Buxar ..............Defendants-Respondents For the Appellan :-Mr. Shashi Shekhar Devedi, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2:- Mr. Jitendra Kishore Verma, Advocate For the Respondent Nos. 3 & 4:- Mr. Raj Kumar Advocate. 05. 09.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsels representing respondent nos. 1 and 2 in one set and respondent nos. 3 and 4 in another. They are in agreement that this appeal be disposed of at the admission stage itself. This appeal has been preferred against order dated 19.02.2009, refusing the prayer of plaintiff-appellant, seeking an order of interim injunction by the court below only on the ground that the petition was filed under Section 151 C.P.C., which independently has no concerne with the prayer made. I fail to appreciate such type of order passed by a Court of Subordinate Judge, who may be presumed a senior Judicial Officer of Subordinate Judiciary. However, without making anything 2 otherwise, I fail to restrain myself in stating that only for non mentioning correct provision of law any prayer made by the litigants cannot be refused by the courts, even when wrong provision of law is mentioned in the application that alone cannot entitle the court to refuse the same. It is the duty cast upon the court to apply appropriate provision of law and thereafter pass order on the prayer in according to its merit. Under the facts and circumstances the members of Bar are also in agreement that impugned order deserves to be set-aside and the matter be remitted before the court below for a decision on merit on the prayer in accordance with law and materials available on record, accordingly, this appeal stands allowed, impugned order is set-aside and matter is remitted to the court below. Simultaneously, court below is directed to proceed expeditiously and decide the prayer of the plaintiff, preferably within two months of visit of copy of this order. Praveen ( Akhilesh Chandra, J.)