(1.) This Original Side Appeal has been directed against the rejection order dated 9.2.2015 passed in C.S.Diary No.31735 of 2014 by the learned Single Judge of this Court.
(2.) The material averments made in the plaint filed in C.S.Diary No.31735 of 2014 may be summarized as follows: The first defendant herein, as plaintiff, has instituted O.S.No.32 of 1986 on the file of Small Causes Court, Chennai, praying to pass a decree of eviction, wherein the present plaintiff and defendants 2 to 6 have been arrayed as defendants. The said suit has been decreed as prayed for, on 22.9.2003 and the same has been challenged in Civil Revision Petition (NPD) No.1961 of 2012 on the file of this Court and the same has also been dismissed. Against the order passed in C.R.P.(NPD) No.1961 of 2012, the first defendant therein/the plaintiff herein has filed a Special Leave Petition in SLP No.20156 of 2014 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the same has also been dismissed on 8.5.2014. Further, it is averred in the plaint that in O.S.No.32 of 1986 on the side of the plaintiff, Ex.P.23 and Ex.P.24 have been filed and Ex.P.23 and Ex.P.24 are nothing but fraudulent documents and the trial court, without considering the contentions raised on the side of the first defendant therein/plaintiff herein, has erroneously decreed the suit. The present plaintiff has originally occupied 742 Sq.ft as a tenant and the same has been sub-leased in favour of the defendants 2 to 6. The first defendant/plaintiff in O.S.NO.32 of 1986 has obtained a decree of eviction against the extent mentioned in Ex.P.1 Sale Seed executed in her favour and since the judgment and decree in O.S.No.32 of 196 have been obtained by way of filing fraudulent documents, the present suit has been instituted for setting aside the same.
(3.) The Registry, without numbering the present suit, has returned it by way of raising certain queries, especially as to how the present suit is legally maintainable Under the said circumstances, the plaint filed in C.S.Diary No.31735 of 2014 has been placed in open court. The learned Single Judge, after considering the contentions raised on the side of the plaintiff, has rejected the plaint by way of passing the impugned order and the same is being challenged in the present Original Side Appeal.