IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1646 of 2008 RAM KUMAR PRASAD Versus BIRENDRA PRASAD ----------- 2. 26.9.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court the impugned order does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, inasmuch as the court below has recorded that whatever was given by way of delivery of possession to the plaintiff landlord was the suit property of the eviction suit. The contention of the petitioner that in course of doing so an area of 2 decimals not belonging to the plaintiff landlord was also given has to be noticed for its being rejected because the court was absolutely confident that the possession given was only for 5 ½ decimals being the suit property of the eviction suit. If there is any such grievance that any additional area of 2 decimals was taken, the proper course for the petitioner would be to file his own suit claiming his right, title and interest in the aforementioned 2 decimals of land. That being so, this Court would not 2 find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this civil revision application is dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/