IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.10299 of 2011 ==================================================== HEERA KUMARI & ORS - Petitioner/s(s) Versus THAKKAN BAITHA & ORS - Respondent/s(s) ==================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s: Mr. SHAILENDRA KUMAR For the Respondent/s: Mr. ==================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO DATE: 04-07-2011 ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO) _________ 2. 04.07.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 17.3.2011 passed by the Munsif, Rosera in Title Suit No. 92 of 2001 whereby the prayer of the petitioner to compare the L.T.I on Shiekh Tegalli appearing on Sada (Khista) with the L.T.I appearing on registered mortgage deed dated 11.5.2009 is rejected. From perusal of the order it appears that the defendant filed rejoinder application to the application filed by the plaintiff disputing the L.T.I on the registered mortgaged deed. This registered 2 mortgage deed has also been filed by the plaintiff. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below found that this L.T.I appearing on the registered mortgage deed is also disputed by the defendant, therefore, there is no admitted document or L.T.I with which the L.T.I occurring in Sada (Khista) should have been sent to the finger print expert for its comparison. Accordingly, the learned court below rejected the said prayer. In view of the grounds, given by the learned court below, I find that it is not a fit case where this court will interfere in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)