AMIT KUMAR SINGH Vs. PUSHPA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite parties.

(2.) This S.C.C. Revision is directed against the order dtd. 24/11/2017 passed by 16th Additional District Judge, Varanasi in S.C.C. Suit No. 18 of 2016 (Pushpa Devi and another Vs. Amit Kumar Singh) whereby the opportunity of defendant/revisionist to file written statement has been closed and by the orders dtd. 27/2/2018 and 31/10/2018, the applications for recall of the order dtd. 24/11/2017 have been rejected.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that S.C.C. Suit No.18 of 2016 was filed by plaintiffs/respondents praying for a decree of arrears of rent and eviction against the defendant/revisionist on 20/7/2016. The defendant/revisionist appeared in the aforesaid suit on 14/10/2016 and filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 C.P.C. which was rejected on 13/8/2017. Another application praying for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the plaint averments regarding the ownership of the suit property are incorrect and they have not been corrected, was filed by the defendant/revisionist which was rejected by the order dtd. 24/11/2017 and opportunity of defendant/revisionist to file written statement has been closed.