Geeta Devi And Ors vs Asif Perwez And Ors

This writ petition is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the order dated 19.11.2018 passed in Title Suit No.167 of 2008 has been assailed by which the document has been sought to be incorporated in the proceeding by virtue of petition dated 21.08.2018.

The brief facts of the case of the petitioners as per the pleading made in the writ petition is that against him an eviction suit has been filed by the defendant No.3 being Eviction Suit No.43 of 1993 in which the decree has been passed against the petitioners for eviction which has been assailed by the petitioners before the appellate court but in the meanwhile, the erstwhile landlord has sold the property in favour of the defendant No.2 who had not contested the suit at the appellate stage and as such, the appeal was allowed ex-parte vide judgment dated 13.03.2013 in favour of the appellants.

The petitioners thereafter, have filed the present title suit being Title Suit No.167 of 2008 seeking therein the reliefs, to retain possession as tenant of suit premises be passed unless evicted through process of law and that defendant be restrained from interfering with lawful possession of the plaintiff in suit premises by grant of appropriate decree/order.

In the aforesaid suit, a petition has been filed on 21.08.2018 seeking therein prayer to incorporate certain document i.e., plan sanctioned of Building Construction Case No.1335 of 2005 along with the maps of the year 2002-11, although the same has been seized by the CBI in connection with the RC Case No.03 of 2011 for investigation but the aforesaid petition has been dismissed against which the present writ petition has been filed.

Mr. D.K. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the document as has been sought to be incorporated in the proceeding for its consideration by marking it as an exhibit has been necessitated to be filed since the said document could not have been filed at the time of filing of the documents at the relevant stage but since these documents are necessary and the said document has subsequently been obtained by the petitioners since it was seized by the CBI in connection with RC Case No.03 of 2011 and hence, the said document ought to have been taken on record for proper and just adjudication of the issue but having not done so, error has been committed, therefore, the instant writ petition.

This Court, after having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and after going through the record as also the finding recorded in the impugned order, has found that the petitioners are plaintiffs to the suit premises and have got the status of tenant when the property in question was owned by the defendant no.3 who has initiated a proceeding for eviction being Eviction Case No.43 of 1993 which was allowed by the court on the ground of personal requirement in favour of the defendant No.3 vide judgment dated 07.01.2005 and decree was drawn up on 20.01.2005.

Plaintiffs have preferred title appeal against the aforesaid judgment/decree being Title Appeal No.23 of 2005 but in course of pendency of the appeal, the defendant no.3, original title holder, has transferred the suit premises in favour of the defendant No.2.

The defendant no.2 has not chosen to contest the appeal, in consequence thereof, the appeal was allowed ex-parte vide judgment dated 13.03.2013 in favour of the appellants as defendant No.2 has transferred the suit premises to defendant No.1.

The trial Court therefore, has come to the conclusion that the document as has been sought to be incorporated in the record is different to that of the pleading of the petitioners made in the present title suit.

Therefore, this Court is also of the view by showing no reason to differ with the view taken by the trial court for the reason that the petitioners have filed the present suit for declaration that he may not be evicted without resorting to the process of law and his peaceful possession may not be disturbed and as such, the document which pertains to the sanction of the building map as has been sanctioned by the competent sanctioning authority has got no nexus to the relief sought for in the writ petition.

In view thereof, the order passed by the trial court does not warrant any interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed.