JUDGMENT Shree Chandrashekhar, J – The petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 28.05.2009 passed in Misc. Case No.09 of 1999 registered in Partition Suit No.13 of 1993. By this order the application filed under section 22 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 for enforcing right of pre-emption has been dismissed. 2. Misc. Case No. 09 of 1999 was registered pursuant to order dated 03.11.1999 passed in Civil Revision No. 224 of 1999 (R), by which order dated 27.03.1999 passed in Partition Suit No.13 of 1993 was dismissed holding that for enforcing his right of pre-emption under section 22 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the applicant is required to file regular civil suit. In view of the Civil Court Rules framed by the Patna High Court, a learned Single Judge of this Court has held that a conjoint reading of Rules 457, 458 and 459 would indicate that application under section 22 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 shall be registered as Miscellaneous (Judicial) Case. Against the order passed in Miscellaneous (Judicial) Case, an appeal shall lie under Rule 461 (ii) of Civil Court Rules. 3. Faced with the aforesaid legal impediment, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file Miscellaneous Appeal as provided under Rule 461 (ii) of the Civil Court Rules. 4. This prayer is opposed by Mr. Arbind Kumar Sinha, the learned counsel for the respondents pleading that the appeal is now barred by limitation. 5. A right to appeal is a statutory right and whether it is barred by limitation or not and whether the time consumed in prosecuting this writ petition shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation or not are the issues which shall be before the appellate court, if the petitioner chooses to prefer an appeal. 6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty as prayed.