JUDGMENT Piggott, J.
1. This is an application in revision against an order permitting a plaintiff to withdraw from a suit with liberty to bring a fresh suit. It is impossible to distinguish this case on the facts from the decision of a Bench of this Court in the case of Jhunku Lal v. Bisheshar Das 46 Ind. Cas. 71 : 16 A.L.J. 495 : 40 A. 612, except that the present is a stronger case in favour of permission to withdraw being granted than was the one then under the consideration of this Court. We have been asked, to reconsider the decision above referred to on the strength of a number of other reported cases. In particular, our attention has been drawn to four case s of thin Court, three of them decided by learned Judges sitting singly and one by a Bench, of two Judges. The facts in almost every case could be more or less distinguished, but the not result, is that two learned Judges of this Court, either sitting singly or sitting together, have on occasions exercised the revisional, jurisdiction of this Court in a manner which it would not be easy to reconcile with the principles laid down in Jhunku Lal v. Bisheshar Das 46 Ind. Cas. 71 : 16 A.L.J. 495 : 40 A. 612. We think that this case was correctly decided and do not feel disposed to re-consider it. This application, therefore, fails and is dismissed with costs, including fees on the higher scale.
Walsh, J.
2. I merely wish to add that I am satisfied I should have made the order that the learned Judge has made..