PRONOY RANJAN BORGOHAIN Vs. ALPANA LAHON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri BD Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Considering the nature of the dispute and also the fact that the original title suit is of the year 2013, this Court proposes to dispose of the present petition at the admission stage.

(3.) The present petitioner is the defendant in the Title Suit which was instituted for ejectment of the tenant. The petitioner had contested the suit and had also taken the defence of deposit of rent in the Court in various NJ cases after the rent which was tendered to the landlord was refused to be received. However, while adducing evidence, the documents of certain NJ cases could not be exhibited as those were untraceable at that point of time. However, subsequently on being able to trace out the same, the petitioner had filed two applications before the learned Court of Munsiff, Charaideo, the first for calling the Sheristadar of the Court to prove the NJ cases and the second for allowing the petitioner to produce additional evidence by invoking the provision under Order XVIII Rule 17 A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). While the first petition was numbered as Petition No.396/2017, the second was numbered as Petition No.118/2017.