- (1.) Aggrieved by order dated 23.09.2014 in Civil Misc. Case No. 95 of 2014 whereby, application under Section 24 CPC has been dismissed, the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) The petitioner was defendant-tenant in Eviction Title Suit No.03 of 1997. The suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 27.06.2006. The suit was decreed both on the ground of default of payment in rent and personal necessity. In the eviction suit, the defendant admitted that he was inducted as a tenant by the plaintiff however, he raised a plea that the suit property is Khasmahal property, which belongs to the State. The defendant made an application in the trial court for deciding the issue whether the suit property is a Khasmahal property or not. The application was dismissed on 21.02.2004 against which, the defendant preferred W.P.(C) No.1381 of 2004. However, the writ petition was dismissed on 25.03.2004. Thereafter, the defendant filed an application under Order I Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC for impleading the State as a party. The said application was dismissed vide order dated 05.08.2004, which was challenged by the defendant in W.P.(C) No.5298 of 2004. The writ petition was dismissed on 09.03.2005 holding that the trial court has rightly held that title cannot be adjudicated in a suit for eviction. Against the judgment and decree dated 28.06.2006, the petitioner preferred Title Appeal No.110 of 2006. In the pending appeal, the petitioner/appellant filed application under Section 151 CPC for calling for record of lease executed in the name of late Baijnath Jalan, who was the original plaintiff. The said application was dismissed vide order dated 13.05.2014. Earlier also, the petitioner has preferred application under Section 151 CPC raising the same plea, which was dismissed on 19.11.2013. The petitioner had also filed a petition under Order 41, Rule 27 CPC, which was rejected vide order dated 14.12.2013.
(3.) On 10.08.2015, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that several applications were filed by the petitioner in Title Appeal No. 110 of 2006 however, the Appellate Court has not considered the same. For filing supplementary affidavit the matter was adjourned for today. Supplementary affidavit dated 12.08.2015 has been filed by the petitioner/appellant disclosing several applications filed by the petitioner including one under Order 41, Rule 27 CPC and another under Section 151 CPC however, no pending application has been indicated. From the materials brought on record, it appears that in title appeal the petitioner-tenant filed several applications and he approached this Court by filing different writ petitions including W.P.(C) No. 3355 of 2014 and W.P.(C) No. 3357 of 2014. The grievance raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the Appellate Court has not looked into merits of the matter. In the application under Section 24 CPC, the petitioner alleged that the Presiding Officer has not considered merit of the case and on several occasions, he observed that petitions filed by him would be rejected. It was further averred that the Presiding Officer is not considering the relevant provisions of law with respect to nature of the suit land being, Khasmahal land and the fraud committed by the plaintiff claiming the suit property.;