IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1763 of 2008 MADHO SINGH & ANR Versus NATHUNI SHARMA & ORS ----------- 6 12/12/2008 Heard counsel for the petitioners. For the reasons mentioned in I.A. No. 6999 of 2008, the delay in filing of this Civil Revision Application is condoned. As with regard to the question of maintainability, since order was passed under Order 26, rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure during pendency of the suit, there will be no question of filing of an appeal against such order. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Application is held to be maintainable. On merits, this Court would not find any error in the impugned order, in as much as, by mere confirmation of the report of Pleader Commissioner, no right of the petitioners is going to be affected. It is well settled that the report of the Pleader Commissioner in order to constitute evidence will have to be proved in accordance with law and the Pleader Commissioner will have to be 2 examined. At the time of such examination of Pleader Commissioner the petitioner can definitely raise whatever objection he has against the report of the Pleader Commissioner. That being so, this application is accordingly disposed of with the aforementioned observation. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) Abhay Kumar