IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.9648 of 2011 Mahendra Bhagat Versus Chandradeo Bhagat & Ors ----------- 02. 24.06.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 24.03.2011 passed by Sub Judge IX, Muzaffarpur in Partition Suit No.5 of 2007 rejecting the application filed under Order 18 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the petitioner for a direction to the defendant to adduce evidence first. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below has considered the fact that the petitioner himself in the plaint claimed that it may be declared that in previous amicable partition the Schedule II property were allotted in his share and in the alternative prayed for preliminary decree for partition. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Court below has rightly rejected the application. Therefore, in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)