HIMANSHU SINGH Vs. RUPA SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have already heard the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff as well as the learned counsel for the opposite parties/defendants.

(2.) This revision application is directed against the order dtd. 2/6/2012 passed in Title Suit No. 147 of 2012 by the 1st Sub-Ordinate Judge, Chapra, Saran.

(3.) The original petitioner/plaintiff filed an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') for withdrawal of the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit which was rejected by the complex and composite order, which is impugned herein. It also appears that vide the same order, the leaned Sub- Ordinate Judge has disposed of the application filed by respondent no.2 under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code, praying therein to reject the plaint as it was barred under Order IX Rule 9 of the Code, but the impugned order does not disclose explicitly whether that application was disposed of or not. The operative portion of the impugned order shows that the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed and at the same time the application of the plaintiff/petitioner under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code for withdrawal of the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit was rejected.