IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13182 of 2011 Khudi Ram Goswami & Ors Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 3. 08.09.2011 The State of Bihar is not necessary party. Therefore, the name of respondent No.1 is deleted. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. This application has been filed by the defendant petitioner against the order dated 15.2.2011 passed by Munsif-2nd Bhagalpur in Title Suit No. 30 of 2006 whereby an application filed by the respondent petitioner under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been rejected. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that earlier the plaintiff respondent filed Title Suit No. 120 of 1998 and after two years the plaintiff allowed the said title suit to be dismissed for default. Against the order the plaintiff did not file either revision or appeal and after expiry of five years the present Title Suit No. 30 of 2006 has been filed and, therefore, according to the learned counsel the earlier order passed in Title Suit No. 120 of 1998 will operate as res judicata. From perusal of the impugned order it appears that the learned court below considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners and it has been recorded that earlier Title Suit No. 120 2 of 1998 was dismissed for default on 21.12.2001. In view of the above facts and circumstances admittedly, none of the issue raised by the plaintiff or the defendants has been decided in the earlier suit and the suit has been dismissed for default. It is well settled that the order dismissing suit for default never operate as res judicata. In my opinion therefore, the learned court below has rightly rejected the application for dismissal of the suit on the ground of res judicata. I therefore, find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)