IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.517 of 2007 ASHOK KUMAR SAH @ ASHOK KUMAR, SON OF SRI LAXMI NARAYAN SAH, RESIDENT OF KATIHAR TOWN, BARA BAZAR, WARD NO.23, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT-KATIHAR. …………………….(DEFENDANT)…………...PETITIONER. Versus 1. KUMAR NEERAJ, SON OF LATE HIRA LAL SAH. 2. RAJEEV KUMAR, SON OF LATE HIRA LAL SAH. 3. KUMARI SHILPI, DAUGHTER OF LATE HIRA LAL SAH. 4. MOST. SUNITA SAH, WIFE OF LATE HIRA LAL SAH. ALL RESIDENT OF KATIHAR TOWN, BARA BAZAR, WARD NO.23, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT- KATIHAR. ……………..(PLAINTIFFS)…………………OPP. PARTIES. 5. SRI LAXMI NARAYAN SAH, SON OF LATE GIRDHARI LAL SAH. 6. SMT. MALTI DEVI, WIFE OF SRI LAXMI NARAYAN SAH. BOTH RESIDENT OF KATIHAR TOWN, BARA BAZAR, WARD NO.23, POLICE STATION AND DISTRICT- KATIHAR. ………………..(DEFENDANTS)…………….OPP. PARTIES. ----------- For the Petitioner : M/s. Raj Kumar, Rajendra Prasad Sah & Praveen Kumar, Advocates. For the State : M/s. Abbas Haidar and Kamil Akhtar, Advocates. ------------ 9. 12.11.2009. After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this Civil Revision. Permission is accorded. 2 This Civil Revision is dismissed as withdrawn. However, it is made clear that the court below has not decided the issue of the suit being barred by the principles of res judicata rather it has deferred the issue to be decided after taking evidence. Thus, that issue should be decided by the court below at appropriate time. P.S. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J)