IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.644 of 2009 Imran Ahmad, son of late Ajizul Rehman, resident of village- Jalwara, P.S. Kewati, District- Darbhanga. …..Defendant no.3….Petitioner. Versus 1. Reza Ahmad, son of Md. Mohibul Haque. 2. Md. Khalid, son of late Md. Safiullah. Both are residents of village- Khirma, P.S. Kewati, District- Darbhanga. …….. Plaintiffs. 3. Md. Rezwan Gani Haider, son of late Azijul Rehman. 4. Irfan Ahmad, son of late Azijul Rehman. 5. Sabana Khatoon, wife of Azizul Rehman. All residents of village- Jalwara, P.S.- Kewati, District- Darbhanga. 6. Ahmadi, wife of Md. Abas, resident of Narayanpur, P.S. Manigachhi, District- Darbhanga. 7. Talat Parvin, wife of Md. Salman, resident of village- Kharat, P.S. Sadar, District- Darbhanga. 8. Md. Mahfuzur Rehman, son of Mokhtar Ahmad, resident of village- Jalwara, P.S. Kewati, District- Darbhanga. 9. Md. Tamana, son of Jiaur Rahman. 10. Md. Sultan Ahmad, son of Jiaur Rehman . 11. Angaru Begam, minor daughter of Jiaur Rahman, under the guardianship of Md. Tamana. 12. Bibi Nagmun Nisa, wife of Md. Jafir. 13. Bibi Hsram Begum, wife of Md. Murtaza. 14. Nejama Minor daughter of Jiaur Rehman, under the guardianship of Md. Tamana. All are residents of village- Jalwara, P.S.- Kewati, District- Darbhanga. …….Defendants. 15. Md. Kamar Alam, son of Abdul Kalam, resident of village- Hasrah, P.S.- Koti, District- Darbhanga. …..Defendants….Opposite Parties. ----------- 03- 29.11.2011 Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Dubey for the petitioner, and Mr. Asif Kalim for opposite party nos.1 and 15. Defendant no.3 of Partition Suit No.157 of 2004, has preferred this civil revision application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and is aggrieved by the order dated 27.3.2009, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge 3rd court, Darbhanga, in the aforesaid suit, whereby his application to recall the order dated 22.12.2006, has been 2 rejected as a result of which he is precluded from filing written statement. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The opposite parties herein have instituted the aforesaid partition suit. Defendant no.3 (the petitioner herein) entered appearance in the suit on 17.2.2006, filed application for adjournment seeking permission to file his written statement which was granted. The petitioner failed to avail of the opportunity, did not file written statement and completely abandoned Pairvi in the suit. The learned trial court ultimately passed the order dated 22.12.2006, debarring defendant no.3 from filing written statement. After lapse of more than five months, the petitioner filed application for recall of the said order dated 22.12.2006, and also permission to file the written statement which has been rejected by the impugned order. We entirely agree with the observations of the learned trial court that defendant no.3 has been negligent in pursuing his case in the suit. The petitioner has also not apprised us of the present stage of the suit. 3. This civil revision application is dismissed. (S K Katriar, J.) S.K.Pathak/ 3