- (1.) THIS revision is against the order dated 15.2.2011 passed by learned Munsif 1st, Dhanbad in Execution Case No.14 of 2009. By the impugned order, learned Munsif has rejected the petitioner's application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(2.) THE short fact of the case is that an order was passed by Rent Controller, Dhanbad fixing fair rent. The petitioner contested the order in appeal and thereafter in revision, but could not succeed. The opposite parties, thereafter, levied execution of the said order of Rent Controller in Execution Case No. 14 of 2009 in the Court of Munsif 1st, Dhanbad. The petitioner, who is the tenant, challenged the said decree by filing objection under Section 47 of CPC. The first ground for challenge to the execution of the said order was that the petitioner has been paying monthly rent as determined by Sub -Judge -VI, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 96 of 2001 and, as such, he is not liable to pay fair rent fixed by the Rent Controller, Dhanbad. The second ground was that since the Title (Eviction) Suit is pending in the Court of Sub -Judge -VI, Dhanbad, learned Munsif has no .jurisdiction to proceed with the execution of the order of Rent Controller.
(3.) LEARNED counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the said objection has been arbitrarily rejected by the impugned order without taking into consideration that the petitioner has been depositing the rent per month, as determined by learned Sub -Judge, under Section 15 of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and since the eviction suit is pending in the Court of Sub -Judge, learned Munsif has no jurisdiction to proceed with the execution case.;