IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.20 of 2010 KAMALI KANT SINGH, son of Late Shiv Balak Singh, resident of village-Lohanda, Police Station-Sikandra, District-Jamui. ............Plaintiff/Decree holder/Opposite Party/Petitioner Versus PREM CHAND JHA, Son of Late Aditya Nath Jha, resident of village, P.O. and P.S. Barahia, District-Lakhisarai. ......Defendant (Judgment Debtor)/Petitioner/Opposite Party. ----------- 5/ 27.01.2011 I.A. No. 8680 of 2010 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner with a prayer for staying the further proceeding in Money Suit No. 3 of 1999, pending in the court of learned Sub-Judge-I, Jamui. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the plaintiff-petitioner brought the aforesaid money suit for a decree for realization of more than two lacs rupees from the sole defendant. According to him, despite valid service of notice, the defendant did not contest the suit, therefore, it was taken up for consideration and was finally decreed ex parte. Against the aforesaid ex parte judgment and decree, the defendant- opposite party filed a Misc. Case No. 2 of 2001 under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside that ex parte judgment and decree, which was finally allowed by order dated 17.08.2009, against which the present Civil Revision Application has been preferred. 2 With the consent of the parties the present interlocutory application as also main Civil Revision application are being taken up for its final disposal. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party submits that since the suit was decreed ex parte without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing, therefore, the miscellaneous case filed on his behalf was allowed by the impugned order dated 17.08.2009. Now Money Suit No. 3 of 1999 has been restored to its original file and is proceeding further. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the main matter pending and direction is fit to be issued to the learned trial court to decide the money suit itself on merit within a reasonable time fixed by this Court. For the reasons aforesaid, without going into the merit of the claim and counter claim of the parties regarding the order impugned, this court directs the learned Sub-Judge-I, Jamui to decide the Money Suit No. 3 of 1999 on priority basis and all endevour should be made to dispose of the same within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of the copy of this order. It 3 goes without saying that if the defendant-opposite party does not lead the evidence in support of his claim on the dates fixed, then the court below would be free to proceed in the matter, and would be fully justified to decide the suit on the basis of materials available on record and placed by the plaintiff-petitioner. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the main Civil Revision application as also the interlocutory application stand disposed of. Anjani/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J )