IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11343 of 2010 1. SHEODHARI PRASAD S/O LATE GANPAT MAHTO, 2. ASHA DEVI W/O RAJ KUMAR PRASAD BOTH R/O VILL.- PATER MANGRAWAN, P.S. WAZIRGANJ, P.O. KANDHARIA, DISTT.- GAYA …………….PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. RAM CHANDRA LALL, S/O LATE PRABHU LAL 2. SUDHIR KUMAR S/O RAM CHANDRA LAL 3. MITHILESH KUMAR S/O RAM CHANDRA LAL ALL R/O VILL.- PATER MANGARWAN, P.O. KANDHARIA, P.S. WAZIRGUNJ, DISTT.- GAYA ….PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS 1ST PARTY 4. ARJUN LAL S/O LATE PRABHU LAL 5. URMILA DEVI W/O ARJUN LAL BOTH PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KOIRIBARI IN THE HOUSE OF NANHAK SAO MILL (RENTAR), P.O. GAYA, P.S. CIVIL LINES, DISTT.- GAYA 6. SARJU MISTRI S/O SHEO BACHAN MISTRI 7. GOPAL MISTRI S/O SHEO BACHAN MISTRI 8. CHANDRADEO MISTRI S/O SHEO BACHAN MISTRI 9. BANTI KUMAR S/O ARJUN LAL ALL R/O VILL.- PATER MANGARWAN, P.O. KANDHARIA, P.S. WAZIRGUNJ, DISTT.- GAYA 10. SMT. VIDYA DEVI D/O LATE PRABHU LAL AND W/O GAYA LAL, R/O MOHALLA- NADRAGANJ, P.S. CIVIL LINES, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA 11. SHAKUNTALA DEVI @ PHUL KUMARI DEVI D/O LATE PRABHU LAL AND W/O UMESH LAL, R/O MOHALLA - NEAR RAM KISHUN ASHRAM, NAWAGARH, P.S. CIVIL LINES, GAYA, DISTT.- GAYA 12. FUL KUMARI @ FULA DEVI D/O LATE PRABHU LAL AND W/O DINESH LAL, R/O VILL.- DHAMAUL, P.S.- DHAMAUL, DISTT.- NAWADA ……….DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS 2ND PARTY For the petitioners : M/s Vishnudeo Narayan and Mani Shankar Narayan, Advocates. For the respondents : None. ----------- 02/ 25.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging order dated 28.04.2010 (Annexure-6) passed by Subordinate Judge-VII, Gaya in Partition Suit No.131 of 1997 (72/2000). 2 The aforesaid suit was filed for partition in which a preliminary decree was prepared much earlier, whereafter the proceeding for preparation of final decree started. In the said proceeding a Pleader Commissioner was appointed who finally produced his takhtabandi report. The petitioner filed objection to it and finally by the impugned order the said objection was rejected and report of the Pleader Commissioner was confirmed and accordingly final decree was directed to be prepared. The law is well settled that such orders are the orders of final decree which bears the date of such orders and hence the findings etc. of the said orders can only be challenged in an appeal having been filed against the final decree. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is absolutely frivolous and misuse of the process of court and is accordingly dismissed. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)