IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1231 of 2006 1. ABDUL GAFOOR @ GAFOOR MIAN SON OF LATE SABJANI MIAN 2. BHAGWAN JHA SON OF LATE VISHWANATH JHA 3. MAHAKANT JHA SON OF LATE BUCHCHI JHA ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE NAGDAH, P.O. NAGDAH, P.S. ARER, DISTT. MADHUBANI. ----DEFENDANT 2ND PARTY-JUDGMENT DEBTORS ----- PETITIONERS. Versus 1. MOST.BACHCHA DEI WIFE OF LATE DIGAMBAR MISHRA. 2. INDRA NARAIN MISHRA 3. SUB NARAIN MISHRA 4. ROOP NARAIN MISHRA SONS OF LATE DIGAMBAR MISHRA 5. MOST. LAL DAI WIFE OF NILAMBAR MISHRA 6. UDAY NARAIN MISHRA 7. KRISHNA KUMAR MISHRA 8. NAWAL MISHRA 9. KISHORE MISHRA NOS. 6 TO 9 ARE SONS OF LATE NILAMBAR MISHRA 10. PITAMBAR MISHRA 11. SWETAMBAR MISHRA SONS OF LATE CHANDRA NARAIN MISHRA ALL ARE THE LEGAL HEIRS/REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PLAINTIFF NIDHA MISRAIN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BALAIN PATTI NAGDAH, P.O. NAGDAH, P.S. ARER, DISTT. MADHUBANI -----PLAINTIFFS/DECREE HOLDERS OPPOSITE PARTY 1ST PARTY. 12 KAMAL NARAIN MISHRA @ BUCHAN MISHRA 13 DHARM NARAIN MISHRA @ BACHCHU MISHRA BOTH ARE THE LEGAL HEIRS/REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DEFENDANT SHAYAMA MISHRAIN WIFE OF LATE AWADH NARAIN MISHRA AND BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BALAIN PATTI NAGDAH, P.O. NAGDAH, P.S. ARER, DISTT. MADHUBANI -----DEFENDANT 1ST PARTY/JUDGMENT DEBTOR 1ST SET ------ OPPOSITE 2ND PARTY. 14. JIBACHH MIAN 15. RAMJANI MIAN 16. SADDIQUE MIAN NOS. 14 TO 16 ARE SONS OF ISMAIL MIAN 17. MOST. JUMANI WIFE OF LATE BUDHAN MIAN 18. AMIRUL MIAN 19. CHAND ALI BOTH SONS OF LATE BUDHAN MIAN 20. SHAKOOR MIAN SON OF LATE SABJANI MIAN 21. SUBIA, DAUGHTER OF LATE SABJANI MIAN 22. SHASHI DEV JHA 23. SATTAR JHA 24. RAGAHU JHA 2 25. BHULLUR JHA NOS. 22 TO 25 ARE SONS OF LATE SUKHDEV JHA 26. MOST. JASHODHA WIFE OF LATE JAI BHADRA JHA 27. KAMDEV JHA 28. SHYAMDEV JHA NOS. 27 AND 28 ARE SONS OF LATE JAI BHADRA JHA 29. DIWAKAR MISHRA @ NUNU MISHRA 30. SHYAM MISHRA BOTH SONS OF LATE SHANKAR DUTTA MISHRA 31. JIWACHH JHA 32. MAHESHWAR JHA BOTH SONS OF LATE SHYAMANAND JHA 33. BAIDHYANATH PRATIHAST SON OF LATE DINESHWAR PRATIHAST 34. MOST. RAJESHWARI DEVI WIFE OF LATE GAURIKANT JHA 35. BIPIN KUMAR JHA 36. KAILASH KUMAR JHA NOS. 35 AND 36 ARE SONS OF LATE GAURIKANT JHA 37. MOST. CHAND DAI WIFE OF LATE UDAY KANT JHA 38. PAWAN KUMAR JHA 39. RATAN KUMAR JHA 40. PRAVEEN KUMAR JHA 41. PRASANN KUMAR JHA NOS. 38 TO 41 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BALAIN PATTI NAGDAH, P.O. NAGDAH, P.S. BENIPATTI, DISTT. MADHUBANI ----DEFENDANT 2ND PARTY/JUDGMENT DEBTOR 2ND SET —OPPOSITE 3RD PARTY. 42. MOST. GYANI DEVI WIFE OF LATE KATUL KANT JHA 43. NARAYAN JHA 44. GOVIND JHA 45. JAGARNATH JHA 46. SAMPAT KUMAR JHA NOS. 43 TO 46 ARE SONS OF LATE KATUL KANT JHA 47. ARUN MISHRA SON OF LATE SUSHIL MISHRA ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ARER,P.O. AND P.S. ARER, DISTT. MADHUBANI ---DEFENDANT 4TH PARTY/JUDGMENT DEBTOR-4TH SET --- OPPOSITE 4TH PARTY. 48. NIRPENDRA JHA SON OF LATE JUGTESHWAR JHA 49. CHANDRA MOHAN JHA 50. INDRA MOHAN JHA 51. UGRA MOHAN JHA NOS. 49 TO 51 ARE SONS OF LATE BINAY CHANDRA JHA ALL ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BALAIN PATTI, NAGDAH, P.O. NAGDAH, P.S. ARER, DISTT. MADHUBANI. ---DEFENDANTS INTERVENORS/JUDGMENT DEBTOR-5TH SET-OPP.5TH PARTY ---- OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 3 For the petitioners : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate. Md. Imteyaz Ahmad, Advocate. For the opposite parties : Mr. Vishwanath Prasad Sinha, Sr. Adv. No. 10. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate. -------- 4. 10/7/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No. 10. Office has reported that against the impugned order, remedy is, by filing an appeal before the court of competent jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not contest the stamp report and seeks permission to withdraw this Civil Revision application to file an appeal before the court of competent jurisdiction. In view of that it is held that the Civil Revision is not maintainable. However, permission is granted to the petitioners to withdraw this Civil Revision for filing an appeal before the court of competent jurisdiction within four weeks from today. If such appeal is filed within such period along with a limitation petition, the court concerned will dispose of the same taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision on bona fide advice. With the aforesaid observations, this Civil Revision application is dismissed as withdrawn. S. Ali (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)