IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2389 of 2007 DHANANJYA KUMAR Versus MUNDRIKA PRASAD & ORS ----------- 9 23/9/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for opposite party no.2. In the opinion of this Court two orders passed by the court below dated 7.9.2002 and its affirmance in the order of the appellate court dated 5.9.2007 would require no interference by this Court in exercise of power under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in as much as, it is an admitted fact that the property in question was handed over to the petitioner in terms of the decree passed in the year 1973 which was annulled by first appellate court in the year 1978. Such decree of the first appellate court was further affirmed by this Court in the year 1996 and ultimately by the Supreme Court in the year 1998. In that view of the matter, when the petitioner through process of the court had got delivery of possession in view of decree passed in the year 1973, both under law and in equity he is bound 2 to return the property to the person by way of restitution in terms of the impugned order. In that view of the matter, this civil revision application is wholly misconceived and is therefore dismissed. ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. ) Abhay Kumar