MOHDNAYEEM Vs. NOOR ALAM KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) None appears for the Opposite Party, although notice had been properly served on him.

(2.) The petitioner is the defendant in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 233/1988. The opposite party being landlord filed the above-mentioned suit against the petitioner for eviction under the B.B.C. Act, but the suit was decree ex-parte in absence of the petitioner-defendant, and the said decree was also executed by evicting the petitioner from the suit premises. The petitioner filed a petition under Order IX, Rule 13, C.P.C., for setting aside the ex-parte decree which was registered as Misc. case and ultimately restoration petition was allowed and the ex-parte decree was set aside. When the suit has again been brought to file, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 144, C.P.C. being Misc. Case No. 5/91 before the Munsif, Jamshedpur, who passed the ex-parte decree for restitution of possession but the learned Munsif without deciding the matter in issue ordered that the restitution matter would be taken up after the original suit is disposed of.

(3.) It should be mentioned here that by that time the eviction suit pending before the Munsif was transferred to the court of Sub Judge-3, Jamshedpur. Against the order passed on 27.5.1992, the petitioner came up before this Court in Misc. Appeal, which was ultimately withdrawn for filing appeal befor ethe appropriate court, as per Annexure-2. Then appeal was preferred before the District Judge being Misc. Appeal No. 3/98. As the Misc. Appeal was not being disposed of the petitioner came up before this Court in Civil Revision No. 146/93 (R), and by order dated 6.10.1993 (Annexure-3), direction was given to expedite the hearing of the Misc. Appeal and it was further ordered that after the disposal of Misc. Appeal, the suit should be heard within three weeks next thereafter.