Kayasts Pathshala Through Anil Kumar Bhatnagar v. Nirmal Kumar Gupta And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2035 of 2015 ====================================================== Kayasts Pathshala Through Anil Kumar Bhatnagar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

Nirmal Kumar Gupta & Ors .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manisha Singh For the Respondent/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MUNGESHWAR SAHOO ORAL ORDER 03-03-2016 Heard learned counsel Mr. Vivek Prasad for the petitioner.

The Court below by order dated 17.09.2014 rejected the intervention application of the petitioner in Title Suit No. 50 of 1993.

It appears that the aforesaid eviction suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent for eviction of the defendant-respondent under the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 on the ground of default. The present petitioner filed application under Order I Rule 10 (2) CPC for being added as party on the ground that in fact, the petitioner is the real owner of the property. By the impugned order, the learned Munsif-II, Sitamarhi has rejected this application.

It may be mentioned here that so far the eviction suit is concerned, the only question to be decided in the suit is whether

Patna High Court CWJC No.2035 of 2015 (2) dt.03-03-2016 2/2 there is relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties or not. So far the question which is being raised by the petitioner is concerned, he is challenging the title of the plaintiff. This issue cannot be decided in the present eviction suit. For deciding the issue as to whether there is relationship of landlord and tenant, the presence of the petitioner is not required. Therefore, the petitioner is not a necessary party. Thus, the Court below has rightly rejected the application.

Therefore, this writ application is dismissed. (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J) ravi/- U T