IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.470 of 2009 SURESH KUMAR, SON OF LATE BIJOY CHAND PRASAD, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – HAJIPUR THANA CHACK, KHAGARIA, WARD NO. 4, P.S. + DISTT. KHAGARIA ------- DEFENDANT 2ND PARTY-APPELLANT Versus 1. MUKESH KUMAR, SON OF MANOHAR PRASAD, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA – HAJIPUR THANA CHAUK KHAGARIA, WARD NO. 4, P.S. + DISTT. KHAGARIA. --------- PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT 1ST SET. 2. SRI MANOHAR PRASAD, SON OF LATE BIJOY CHAND PRASAD. 3. SMT. USHA DEVI, WIFE OF SRI MANOHAR PRASAD 4. RAJESH KUMAR, SON OF MANOHAR PRASAD. ALL RESIDENT OF MOHALLA HAJIPUR THANA CHAUK, KHAGARIA, WARD NO. 4, P.S. & DISTT. KHAGARIA. -----DEFENDANTS 1ST PARTY/RESPONDENT 2ND SET. 5. SRI RAJ KISHORE PD., SON OF LATE BIJOY CHAND PRASAD, RESIDENT OF N.A.C. ROAD KHAGARIA, WARD NO. 5, P.S. + DISTT. KHAGARIA. ----- DEFENDANT 3RD PARTY-RESPONDENT 3RD SET. 6. MALATI DEVI, DAUGHTER OF LATE BIJOY CHAND PRASAD, WIFE OF LATE SURAJ NARAIN PRASAD, RESIDENT OF HATAN ROAD, NEAR KALISTHAN, P.O. + P.S. ASANSOL, DISTT. BARDWAN (WEST BENGAL) 7. SMT. SUSHILA DEVI, DAGHTER OF LATE BIJOY CHAND PRASAD, WIFE OF SRI ABHAY KUMAR, C/O SHIVAM SALES LINE TANK ROAD, NEAR BAGACHI NURSHING HOME, P.O + P.S. + DISTT. RANCHI (JHARKHAND) 8. SMT. SHOBHA DEVI, DAUGHTER OF LATE BIJOY CHAND PRASAD, WIFE OF ISHWAR CHANDRA SAO, C/O OMI ROMETALING WORKS, G.T. ROAD, EAST RAMBNDHU TALAB, P.O. + P.S. ASANSOL, DISTT. BARDWAN (WEST BENGAL) ----DEFENDANT 4TH PARTY-RESPONDENT 4TH SET. 9. SMT. RENU KUMARI, DAUGHTER OF SRI PRABHU NARAYAN SINGH, WIFE OF BIJOY KUMAR SINGH 10. SMT. ANURADHA KUMARI SINGH, DAUGHTER OF SRI PRABHU NARAYAN SINGH, BOTH RESIDENT OF ELECTRIC GRID SUB SECTION ROAD CHANDRA NAGAR, P.O. KOSHI COLLEGE, P.S. + DISTT. KHAGARIA. 11. SRI SHASHIKANT KUMAR SHASHI @ AMAR KUMAR SINGH, SON OF SRI LAXMI PRASAD SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TARBANNA PACHVIR PARGANA BALIA, P.S. SAHEBPUR KAMAL, P.O. PACHVIR, DISTT. BEGUSARAI. ---- DEFENDANT 5TH PARTY/RESPONDENT 5TH SET. ----------- 5. 25.1.2011 Heard the parties. The appellant is aggrieved with the order dated 10.7.2009 passed in Title Partition Suit No. 92 of 2001 by Sub Judge-III, Khagaria, who has rejected an application for an ad- interim injunction with regard to the suit property. 2 On hearing the rival submissions, I find that the order impugned was passed way back on 10.7.2009 and till date, no part of the suit property has been sold out or alienated and, therefore, the apprehension of the appellant was evidently misconceived. It is conceded by both the parties that an attempt should be made for an early disposal of the suit since it belongs to the year 2001 for which both the parties are agreeable that they will not seek unnecessary adjournments and will present themselves on each date fixed in the case. In view of such, the application is disposed of with the direction to the Sub Judge-III, Khagaria, to dispose of matter within one year of the receipt of the order positively and not grant unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. With these observations, the application is disposed of. S.Ali ( Anjana Prakash, J.)