IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.377 of 2007 1. Kamdeo Singh 2. Krishna Kumar Singh, both sons of Late Kartik Singh, resident of village Telghi, P.S. Kharik,District Bhagalpur. ….Plaintiffs-Opposite parties-Petitioners. Versus Jarmani Singh son of Late Ram Raksha Singh, resident of village Telghi, P.S. Kharik, District Bhagalpur. ….Petitioner-Appellant-Opposite Party For the petitioners : Mr. Binod Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the opposite party : None. ----------- 06/ 05.08.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. This civil revision has been filed by the plaintiffs- opposite parties-petitioners challenging order dated 18.11.2006 by which the learned Additional District Judge-III, Naugachia (Bhagalpur) allowed M.A. No.31 of 2005 and set aside order dated 26.07.2005 passed in Miscellaneous Case no.06 of 1991. 3. The matter arises out of Title Suit No.127 of 1985, which was filed by the plaintiffs-petitioners against the State of Bihar and Ramakant Singh for declaration of title and confirmation of possession and for other ancillary reliefs, including the correction of R.S. entries, which were made in the name of the State with Ramakant Singh as awaidh dakhalkar. The said suit was decreed ex- parte by the learned trial court on 26.04.1991. 4. Against the said ex-parte decree Miscellaneous Case No.06 of 1991 was filed under the provision of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’ for 2 the sake of brevity) by the sole opposite party and the said miscellaneous case was allowed by the trial court vide order dated 19.03.2004 (annexure-2) The petitioners filed an application dated 02.04.2004 praying for review of order dated 19.03.2004 passed in Miscellaneous Case No.06 of 1991. The said application dated 02.04.2004 was allowed by the trial court on 26.07.2005 reviewing its earlier order dated 02.04.2004 and dismissing Miscellaneous CaseNo.06 of 1991. 5. The sole opposite party challenged the said order dated 26.07.2005 in Miscellaneous Appeal No.31 of 2005 in which notices were issued to the petitioners, who appeared and contested the same. However, after hearing the parties and considering the matters in detail the learned lower appellate court specifically found that a petition for review against order dated 19.03.2004 was definitely maintainable but no proper application for review in the form of miscellaneous case was filed and the said order dated 26.07.2005 was passed in a simple petition dated 02.04.2004 without compliance of the provisions of order XLVII Rule 3 of the Code as well as the form prescribed therein, specially Chapter X of the General Rules of Civil Courts including valuation, etc. after which a regular miscellaneous case should have been initiated. 6. Hence the said application dated 02.04.2004 not being in any legal and proper form of miscellaneous case for review under the provision of Order XLVII Rule 3 of the Code, the learned court of appeal below rightly dismissed the same vide his impugned 3 order dated 18.11.2006 holding that on its basis no order such as order dated 26.07.2005 should have been passed. Hence the learned lower appellate court was quite justified in setting aside the aforesaid order dated 26.07.2005 passed in Miscellaneous Case No.06 of 1991 giving the liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh miscellaneous case in proper form for review of order dated 19.03.2004, subject to the law of limitation. 7. This court does not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order of the learned court of appeal below. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. However, the petitioners will be at liberty to file a fresh and proper miscellaneous case for review of order dated 19.03.2004 passed in Miscellaneous Case No.06 of 1991 before the appropriate court within one month from today. If the said miscellaneous case is filed along with an application for condoning the delay, the learned trial court will consider the same in accordance with law keeping in view the period spent in the miscellaneous appeal as well as in this civil revision. harish/ ( S. N. Hussain, J. )