IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.232 of 2009 Gauri Shankar Choudhary @ Gauri Shankar Prasad Chaudhary, son of Sri Permanand Choudhary, resident of Mungeriganj, P.O. & P.S. and District Begusarai…. Defendlant/Petitioner Versus 1.Ramji Bhagat son of late Mahabir Bhagat, resident of village Mirjapur Banduar, P.O. Mirzapur Banduar Pergana Ballia, Sub-division and District Begusarai… Plaintiff/Opposite Party Ist Party 2. Salim Haider son of Akhtar Hussain, resident of Lakhisarai, P.O., P.S. & District Lakhisarai, at present Begusarai, Pergana Ballia, Ward no. 9 Katchary Road, Near Nagar Thana, Begusarai P.O. and P.S. and District Begusarai… …Defendant/Opp. Party IInd Party … For the Petitioner: Mr. S.M. Sabbir Alam, Advocate. … 2 12.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The defendant-petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 14.11.2008 passed by the Munsif Ist, Begusarai in Title Eviction Suit No. 2 of 1998, whereby the prayer of the defendant-petitioner for recalling the order for closing of the evidence and calling for the original documents of licence granted to opposite party no. 2 from the proper authority has not been acceded to. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there has already been an order calling for the document concerned, which could not come despite issuance of memorandum of the court as well as the notice. He further 2 submits that the document is necessary for proving his case; therefore, the court below ought to have recalled the earlier order dated 13.05.2008, whereby the evidence of this defendant-petitioner has been closed and further order should been passed for calling for the original document concerned from the office of the proper authority. The trial court has considered this matter and has recorded its finding that on request of this defendant the evidence was closed on 13.05.2008 without waiting for the document concerned and it was well known to the defendant-petitioner at that time that the document aforesaid is still wanting. This is an eviction suit of 1998 and since, in my opinion, there is no jurisdictional error in the order, it is not possible for this Court to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in this matter. In the result, this civil revision application is dismissed. SC (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)