BENEDIK KERKETTA Vs. ARUN K LAKRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed affidavit on service of notice upon the respondent.

(2.) The petitioner, defendant in Title Suit (Eviction) No.25 of 2012, is aggrieved of order dated 20.07.2017 by which amendment in the written statement has been declined.

(3.) Title Suit (Eviction) No.25 of 2012 was instituted by Arun K. Lakra for a decree for eviction of the defendant from the suit premises on the ground of default in payment of rent from March, 2012. Suit was contested by the defendant denying that he was tenant under Emanuel Kerketta or his wife-Smt. Shushila Kerketta, rather he has claimed that he is adopted son of Emanuel Kerketta by virtue of a deed of adoption dated 04.12.1974. The defendant has asserted that Smt. Shushila Kerketta being a female member of the schedule tribe family cannot inherit any immovable property belonging to a member of the family and that transfer of the suit land was in contravention of section 46 of C.N.T Act, 1908. In the pending suit after the plaintiff 's evidence was closed, the defendant filed an application for incorporating the following paragraphs in the written statement: 11(a). That the defendant after proper inquiry and investigation has come to know in the month of August 2016 about the fact that the deceased father of the Plaintiff was known as Shanti Prakash Rai and the Plaintiff was known as Arun Kumar Rai therefore neither the father of the Plaintiff nor the Plaintiff himself is a member of Schedule Tribe and the alleged registered deed dated 14.02012 being deed no.2600 for the year 2012 is totally in contravention of Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act and thus ineffective, void, illegal and sham.