RAMESH KUMAR Vs. SUDHA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 15022013 ( Annexure P1) and the order dated 22122012 (Annexure P2) passed by Second Additional District Judge, Gwalior (MP) in Civil Suit No.11 A/2010, are called in question in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution.

(2.) The plaintiffsrespondents filed a suit for eviction and recovery of rent. The Court below by order dated 18082011 struck off the defence of the petitioner under Section 13(6) of M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 [ hereinafter referred to as " the Act'']. Thereafter, the respondents plaintiffs filed an application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC to take certain documents on record. The application of the plaintiffs respondents was allowed by the trial Court on 14082012 (Annexure P7). Thereafter, the petitionerdefendant preferred an application under Order 8 Rule 1(3) read with Section 151 CPC alongwith list of documents before the Court below. The Court below dismissed the said application (Annexure P7) by order dated 22022012 (Annexure P3). It was held by the Court below that once the defence of the petitioner was struck off by order dated 18082011, it is no more open for the petitioner to file documents in defence. The petitioner filed an application under Section 151 CPC dated 0522013, which was again dismissed by the Court below on 15022013 ( Annexure P1).

(3.) Shri Chandil, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 18082011 whereby the defence of the petitioner was struck off, will not preclude the petitioner to put forth his case and defence. Learned counsel further submits that right of defence of the petitioner only under Section 12(1) of the Act is struck off and still his right of defence under general law is applicable to him. In the written statement, the petitioner has denied the landlord and tenant relationship with the plaintiffs. Therefore, even if the defence is struck off under Section 13(6) of the Act, still the petitioner has a right to establish that the respondents are not the landlord and owner of the suit property and to prove this defence, the documents are required to be taken on record.