Bibi Saira Bano @ Sayra v. Bibi Rauna Khatoon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CIVIL REVIEW No.175 of 2025 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1971 of 2016 ====================================================== 1.

Bibi Saira Bano @ Sayra Wife of Late Sirajuddin Khan, Resident of Mohalla - Sharifganj (Laliyahi), P.O.- Mirchaibari, P.S. and District- Katihar. 2.

Jainuddin Khan, Son of Late Hasan Khan, Resident of Mohalla - Sharifganj (Laliyahi), P.O.- Mirchaibari, P.S. and District- Katihar. 3.

Jalauddin Khan, Son of - Late Sirajuddin Khan (Wrongly mentioned as son of - Late Hasan Khan in the Impugned Order) Resident of Mohalla - Sharifganj (Laliyahi), P.O.- Mirchaibari, P.S. and District- Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Bibi Rauna Khatoon Wife of - Shamshl Haque, Resident of MohallaSharifganj, P.O.- Mirchaibari, P.S. and District- Katihar. 2.

The State of Bihar through the Collector, Katihar, Collectrate, DistrictKatihar. 3.

The Additional Collector, Katihar Collectorate, Katihar, District Katihar. 4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Katihar, SDO Office Compound, Katihar. 5.

The D.C.L.R. Katihar, SDO Office Compound, Katihar. 6.

The Circle Officer, Katihar Anchal, At and P.O. - Katihar, District- Katihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bimal Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Additional Advocate General 12 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-11-2025 Heard.

2. This petition has been filed with a prayer to review the order dated 04-03-2025 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1971 of 2016.

3. According to Order 47 only an error, apparent on the face of the record, is to be cured under the jurisdiction

Patna High Court C. REV. No.175 of 2025(3) dt.07-11-2025 2/2 exercising the power of review. By order under review, the measurement of the land, in question was directed by this court.

4. Learned counsel for the review petitioners submits that it was not the prayer of the writ petitioners to get his land measured.

5. In paragraph-3 of the relief, claimed for by the petitioners, it has specifically been mentioned that if, they are found entitled to, for any other reliefs, it should be granted.

6. I do not find any merit in the present review petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) A.K.V.//- U