BECHAN PURBEY Vs. BIPIN NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision application is filed under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred as 'CPC'), for setting aside the order dtd. 11/7/2019, passed in Title Suit No. 41 of 2017 by learned Subordinate Judge, Jhanjharpur-III, whereby and where under learned Subordinate judge has rejected the petition filed on behalf of defendant no.5/petitioner for dismissal of the aforesaid suit.

(2.) Heard both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite party 1st set.

(3.) The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the Opposite Party 1st Set filed Title Suit No. 41 of 2017, originally in the Court of learned Subordinate Judge, Senior Division, Jhanjharpur, and currently pending in the Court of learned Subordinate Judge-III, Jhanjharpur, seeking a decree for specific performance of an alleged Agreement for Sale in respect of the suit premises. The subject matter of the suit is a house constructed on 15 dhur of land, appertaining to Khata No. 636 (Old) and 2791 (New), Plot No. 7752 and 7750 (Old) and 11474 (New), situated at Mauza Madhepur, Police Station and Anchal Madhepur, District-Madhubani, bounded in the North by Sushil Mandal (Son of Baldeo Mandal), South by Road, East by Surya Narayan Purbey, and West by Dukhan Mandal (Sebait Radha Krishna Mandir). The specific case of the petitioner is that the said property originally belonged to the Opposite Party 2nd Set (Opposite Parties No. 4 to 7), who had acquired the property in four equal parts through four separate registered sale deeds (marked as Annexure 1) dtd. 3/8/1992, totaling an area of 15 dhur. Prior to the dispute, half of the property (southern side of P.C.C. road) was under the tenancy of the petitioner, while the remaining half (eastern side) was under the tenancy of the Opposite Party 1st Set. Subsequently, the Opposite Party 2nd Set expressed their intention to sell the entire property, and upon finalization of negotiations, the petitioner purchased the same for lawful consideration via a registered sale deed (marked as Annexure 2) dtd. 14/2/2017. Following the purchase, the petitioner filed Eviction Suit No. 01 of 2017 in the Court of learned Munsif, Jhanjharpur, to evict the Opposite Party 1st Set from the tenanted portion. The petitioner asserts that upon learning of the eviction proceedings, the Opposite Party 1st Set, with mala fide design and by falsely alleging an oral Agreement for Sale with the Opposite Party 2nd Set, filed the aforesaid Title Suit No. 41 of 2017.