1. Heard Mr. Dronacharya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rajni Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed questioning the order dated 22.8.2009 passed by the learned Sub-Judge 1st, Kaimur at Bhabhua in Misc. Case No.63 of 1999 arising from Probate Case No.57 of 1993, whereby the learned court below has been pleased to reject the petition filed by the petitioner who is opposite party in the court below questioning the jurisdiction of the court to proceed in the matter in the light of the statutory provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

3. The only issue that is sought to be raised by Mr. Dronacharya which also led to filing of the application questioning the jurisdiction of the court is that in view of the provisions of sections 264, 265 and 286 of the Act, the learned Sub-Judge cannot be held to be a District Judge within the meaning of sections 2(bb) of the Act. With reference to section 265 of the Act it is stated that although the power has been vested in the High Court to appoint any judicial officer to act f