IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16400 of 2011 Bhagi Sah & Anr Versus Somel Soren & Ors ----------- 02. 22.09.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the plaintiffs against the order dated 25.03.2011 passed by Additional Munsif III, Jamui in title suit no.38 of 2004 whereby he rejected the applications filed by the petitioners for directing the defendant-respondent to produce his daughter namely, Sheela Soren @ Sona Di for comparing her thumb impression with the thumb impression appearing on the disputed sale deed dated 30.08.1980. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that it is admitted fact that the property belonged to Sonari Soren and, therefore, the Court below held that whether she executed the sale deed or not will be decided only after comparing her thumb impression appearing on the disputed sale deed. The learned Court below accordingly directed the plaintiff to produce the said Sonari Soren. In such circumstances, according to the learned Court below, it is not necessary to compare the thumb impression of the daughter of defendant namely Sheela Soren with the disputed thumb impression on the sale deed. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I find no jurisdictional error in the impugned order. 2 Therefore, in supervisory jurisdiction, the impugned order cannot be interfered with. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Saurabh ( Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)