IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1899 of 2006 MUKESH KUMAR & ORS Versus NATH SINGH & ANR ----------- For the petitioners: Mr R.K.P.Singh, Advocate Mr Manish Kishore. Advocate For the Opposite parties: Mr Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate Ms Kusum Kumari, Advocate ---------- 8 19.08.2009 Perused the office note and heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as opposite parties on the point of maintainability. Office has pointed out that this civil revision has been filed against an order holding that the appeal has automatically abated from the death of Harkhu Singh, vendor. Thus, it becomes an order appelable under Order XLIII Rule 1(k) of the Code of Civil Procedure. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contested the stamp report. Even assuming that the order is passed refusing to grant leave to the petitioners to be substituted in place of their vendor, filed under Order XXII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the same would be appelable as per the provision under Order XLIII Rule 1(m) of the Code of Civil Procedure, as has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the opposite parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners also admits the situation. In view of above, I hold that this civil revision is not maintainable. However, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to convert this civil revision into miscellaneous appeal - 2 - for the reason that the impugned order having been passed by the Addl. District Judge concerned in title appeal, the appeal against that order would also have to be filed before this court. No objection is raised by learned counsel for opposite parties. Permission is accorded. Learned counsel for the petitioners is allowed to convert this civil revision into miscellaneous appeal within three weeks from today. ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) shahid