UMA SHANKAR SHAW Vs. BHOLA NATH SHAW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant in a suit for eviction of licensee has preferred the instant revisional application against an order, whereby two prayers of the petitioner were rejected. The first of such prayers, made by way of an application under section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was for implementation of an order of injunction by police help. On January 25, 2017, the trial court passed an order of injunction restraining the plaintiff/opposite party from creating any type of obstruction or hindrance at the time of joining electric cable with the electric meter existing in the suit property in the name of the defendant. Such order of injunction attained finality. The petitioner alleged that the present opposite party was causing obstruction to the joining of electric cable to the petitioner's meter.

(2.) The second portion of the impugned order dealt with an application filed by the defendant/petitioner for discovery of certain purported agreements dated December 29, 2006, November 29, 2007, September 14, 2009, August 23, 2010 and July 14, 2011, which, the petitioner alleged, were in the custody of the plaintiff/opposite party.

(3.) It is submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that the trial court committed jurisdictional error in refusing both the applications. As far as the application for discovery of documents was concerned, the trial court proceeded on the premise that the petitioner had not mentioned the documents-in-question in the pleadings of the petitioner. Pointing to the averment made by the defendant/petitioner in paragraph no. 10 of the petitioner's written statement, learned counsel shows that it was mentioned therein "that the agreements between the parties dated 29.12.2006 to 14.7.2011 all are tenancy agreement not a license agreement.....".