IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1320 of 2008 PRITHVINATH SAH Versus SRI JHALA SAH & ANR ----------- 2. 20.8.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. The impugned order, to say the least, is a perverse order, which does not give any reason for allowing the intervention application. The court below ought to have taken into consideration that merely discussing the case of the parties is not enough but recording a finding thereon is the requirement of law. From the impugned order, it appears that the court below has only held that the intervention of the intervener is in the interest of the property but no reason or finding has been given for its such one line conclusion. That being so, this Court cannot sustain the impugned order and the same is hereby set aside with a direction to the court below to reconsider the matter in accordance with law. Let it be noted that this Court has not gone into the issue as to whether the intervener should or should not be allowed for being added as a party. 2 This application is accordingly allowed with the aforementioned observations. ( Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/