SUMERMALL JAIN Vs. SMT. TANUSREE DUTTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by order dated 20.04.2015 in Eviction Title Suit Nos. 26 of 2006 and 27 of 2006 whereby, application under Order 6, Rule 17 C.P.C. has been dismissed, the present writ petitions have been filed.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that, initially, a tenancy was created in the name of M/s Laddu Lal Jain. Mr. Laddu Lall Jain was the grandfather of the petitioner namely, Sumermall Jain. Title Eviction Suit No. 105 of 1980 was filed in which an ex parte order dated 07.04.1983 was passed directing the defendant to vacate the suit premises. The defendant handed over possession of one shop and remaining two shops remained in possession of the defendants in Title Eviction Suit Nos. 26 of 2007 and 27 of 2007. It is stated that a new tenancy was created on 27.08.1983 in favour of the present petitioners. In the eviction suits, the defence of the defendants was struck off vide order dated 17.11.2011 for default in depositing arrears of rent. The petitioners approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 6044 of 2012 along with W.P.(C) No. 6034 of 2012 which were allowed vide order dated 28.02.2013 and the petitioners were permitted to lead evidence. After the plaintiff led evidence, the defendants' evidence was closed on 20.02.2015. Thereafter, husband of the plaintiff who was examined as P.W. 3 was recalled for cross-examination. At this stage, application under Order 6, Rule 17 was filed on 25.03.2015 for incorporating the following facts in the written statement:

(3.) The said application has been dismissed vide order dated 20.04.2015, against which the present writ petitions have been filed.