SURENDRA GOSAI Vs. AJIT KUMAR BISWAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :-This revision is directed against the order dated 27-1-92 passed by the Assistant District Judge, No. 1, Silchar, in Title Appeal No. 60 of 1987.

(2.) The petitioners instituted a suit (TS No. 70/86) against the opposite party for eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent and also continuance of possession after expiry of the period of lease. The opposite party were defendants in the said suit. They filed written statement challenging the right of the plaintiff to get a decree as prayed for. According to the opposite party there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Both sides adduced evidence by examining their witnesses. The contention of the plaintiffs/petitioners is that they are landlords and defendants/opposite party are tenants and in spite of repeated demand they failed to pay rent. Besides, they are continuing to occupy the land even after expiry of the period. The Munsiff dismissed the suit. The petitioners preferred an appeal (TA 60/87) before the Assistant District Judge, Cachar, Silchar. During the pendency of the appeal a petition under O.41, R.27 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed stating, inter alia that in 1985 there was a devastating flood and as a result, vast area of Silchar town including the residential house of the petitioners submerged. As a result, the petitioners had to remove all movable properties belonging to them. The receipt book regarding collection of rent was not traceable in spite of their best efforts, therefore, the counterfoils of the receipt book could not be produced at the time of trial of the suit. However, during pendency of the appeal, while cleaning the first floor the receipt book was found and immediately thereafter the petitioners filed a petition. This petition was supported by an affidavit sworn by the petitioners. In the said petition, the petitioners prayed for allowing them to adduce additional evidence and for accepting the counterfoils of receipt book, as the receipt book was very much material to prove the relationship of landlords and tenants.

(3.) The appellate court, however, dismissed the petition. The Court observed that the appeal was filed on 16-11-87 and the petition for additional evidence and its acceptance was presented on 6-5-91.,The Court further observed that the appellant was negligent in the appeal and only after long time filed the petition stating that on 1-5-91 while cleaning the first floor found the papers. According to the Asstt. District judge this petition was filed just to fill up lacunae in the suit and the Asstt. District Judge by his order dated 27-1-92 rejected the petition. Hence the present petition.