IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7497 of 2004 1. RAVI RANJAN SINHA, Son of Sidheshwar Prasad. 2. Sanjiv Kumar, Son of Kameshwar Prasad. Both residents of Village & P.O. Atimi, P.S. Nawanagar, District-Buxar. …Plaintiffs/Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. Ram Chandra Pandey. 3. Hira Pandey. 4. Indradeo Pandey. 5. Janardan Pandey. Sons of late Tulsi Pandey. 6. Ramadhar Pandey. 7. Sushil Pandey. 8. Wakil Pandey Sons of late Deodhari Pandey. 9. Bishwanath Pandey, Son of late Narsingh Pandey. 10. Shri Bhagwan Pandey. 11. Bidesh Pandey. Both sons of late Muni Pandey. 12. Anil Kumar Pandey, Son of late Jagdish Pandey. 13. Most. Shanti Devi, Wife of late Jagdish Pandey. 14. Bashishtha Pandey. 15. Ranjan Pandey. Both sons of late Badri Pandey. 16. Bindeshwari Pandey, Son of late Ramji Pandey. All residents of Village-Bishwa, P.O. Nawanagar, P.S. Nawanagar, District- Buxar. 17. Mundrika Singh. 18. Narendra Singh. 19. Singhasan Singh. Sons of late Palita Singh. 20. Ram Sundari Devi. 21. Motisari Devi. Both wives of late Mani Singh. All are residents of Village-Bharkunda, P.O. Dhan Bakhara, P.S. Nawanagar, District Buxar. …3rd Set Defendants 22. Amarendra Kumar Sinha. 23. Binod Kumar Sinha. Sons of late Sankata Prasad, residents of Village- Dhadhani, P.S. Tarighat, 2 District Gajipur (U.P.). ….1st Set 24. Baban Mishra Son of late Sita Ram Mishra. 25. Mostt. Sushila Devi, Wife of late Shivnandan Pandey, Both residents of Village Atimi, P.S. Nawanagar, District-Buxar. …2nd Set Defendants 26. Baleshwar Prasad 27. Rameshwar Prasad 28. (A) Sudha Srivastava, W/o late Kameshwar Prasad. (B) Rajiv Kumar, S/o late Kameshwar Prasad. Both residents of Village-Atimi, P.S. Nawanagar, District-Buxar. 29. Sidheshwar Prasad. 30. Umesh Prasad. 31. Dinesh Prasad. All sons of late Dharmnath Sahay, residents of Village-Atimi, P.S. Nawanaga, District-Buxar. .....Defendants 4th Set 32. Bijay Kumar Sinha, Son of Rameshwar Prasad. 33. Satendra Prasad Singh. 34. Narendra Prasad Singh. Both sons of Bishwanath Singh. 35. Dewashray Singh, Son of Jangali Singh, All are residents of Village-Amirpur, P.S.- Nawanagar, District- Buxar. ..Defendants/Respondents. ----------- 3/ 01.04.2011 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. The petitioners have filed the present writ petition questioning the validity and legality of the order dated 09.05.2003 (Annexure1), passed in Title Suit No. 199 of 1983 by learned 2nd 3 Subordinate Judge, Buxar, as also the appellate order dated 01.04.2004 (Annexure 2), passed in Misc. Appeal No. 6 of 2003 by learned District Judge, Buxar, whereby the prayer made on behalf of the plaintiffs-petitioners herein for appointment of a receiver with respect to suit properties, detailed in schedule III of the plaint, has been rejected. 3. Admittedly, suit was filed in the year 1983 and almost 28 years have elapsed since then. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by issuance of show-cause notice to the defendants-respondents herein for deciding the issues involved in the present proceeding. 4. Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has fairly submitted that instead of deciding the issues involved in the present proceeding, it would be appropriate that suit itself be directed to be disposed of by learned trial court within a reasonable period of six months. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf 4 of the State has no instruction in this matter, but he also fairly submits that suit itself be directed to be disposed of within a reasonable period of time. 6. After having heard the parties and in the background of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that interest of justice would be subserved by issuing a direction to learned trial court, namely, learned 2nd Subordinate Judge, Buxar or any transferee court, to make all endeavours to dispose of the Title Suit No. 191 of 1983 expeditiously, preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. It is ordered accordingly. 7. It is made clear that neither the plaintiffs nor the defendants shall be granted unnecessary adjournment and if either party tries to prolong the disposal of the suit, then the trial court shall be at liberty to proceed further ex parte. 8. It goes without saying that the observations made in the impugned orders refusing to appoint a receiver on the basis of prayer made on behalf of the plaintiffs shall not adversely affect the case of 5 the parties while deciding the title suit on merit. The suit has to be decided on merit in accordance with law on the basis of materials available on the record. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Anjani/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)