Madhya Pradesh High Court
Saqib Khan vs Ravindra Suri on 24 August, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 MP 1410
Author: J.K. Maheshwari
Bench: J.K. Maheshwari
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR
SINGLE BENCH : BEFORE JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
Writ Petition No.8104/2017
Saqib Khan
vs.
Ravindra Suri
Writ Petition No.10012/2017
Saqib Khan
vs.
Ravindra Suri
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Siddharth Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sankalp Kochar, learned counsel for the respondents.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
(24/8/2018) Petitioner who is a tenant, has filed both these petitions. In W.P. No.8104/2017, the petitioner has claimed following reliefs :-
(i) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue any appropriate writ/order/direction quashing & setting aside the order dated NIL, passed by the Court of VIII ADJ, Bhopal in C.S. No.419-A/14, through which the learned Court has ordered the petitioner to be treated as ex-parte in the suit proceedings.
(ii) This this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue any appropriate writ/order/direction quashing & setting aside the order dated 18.5.2017, passed by the Court of VIII ADJ, Bhopal in C.S. No.419-
:: 2 ::
Saqib Khan vs. Ravindra Suri W.P. Nos. 8104/2017 & 10012/2017 A/14, through which the learned Court has reserved the aforesaid suit for delivery of final judgment, without extending the due opportunity to the petitioner to defend himself in the suit proceedings.
(iii) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue any appropriate writ/order/direction directing the District Judge, Bhopal for transferring the file and record of C.S. No.419-A/14 to any other Court of equal jurisdiction for its final adjudication in accordance with law, from the currently constituted Court of VII ADJ, Bhopal (Smt. Savita Dube).
(iv) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted to the petitioner.
while in W.P. No. 10012/2017, the petitioner has claimed the following reliefs :-
(i) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue any writ/order/direction quashing & setting aside the order dated 05.07.2017 passed in MJC No.311/2017 by the Court of District Judge, Bhopal, through which the learned Court has rejected the application u/s 24, CPC and, further directing for transferring the file and record of C.S. No.419-A/14 to any other Court of equal jurisdiction for its final adjudication in accordance with law, from the currently constituted Court of VII ADJ, Bhopal (Smt. Savita Dube).
:: 3 ::
Saqib Khan vs. Ravindra Suri W.P. Nos. 8104/2017 & 10012/2017
(ii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted to the petitioner.
On perusal of the facts of the case, the present suit 419-A/14 has been filed seeking eviction against the defendant under the provisions of Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 on very many grounds with respect to the House No.204 and 205, Plot Nos.241 & 242 of M.P. Nagar, Bhopal seeking arrears of rent and eviction thereof. In the said suit, the petitioner proceeded ex parte on 12.1.2016. An application under Order 9 Rule 7 of CPC has been filed which is pending for consideration. Thereafter, the Court vide order dated 25.1.2016 decided the application under Order 38 Rule 5 CPC filed by the plaintiff, application under Section 10 of CPC filed by the defendant, application under Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC filed by the defendant and application under Section 13(6) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act filed by the plaintiff. Thereafter, the order has also been passed to close the right of the defendant. The defendant applied under Section 24 of CPC before the District Judge, Bhopal seeking transfer of the said case which was rejected by the order impugned which is under challenge in W.P. No.10012/2017. In the meantime, complaint was made regarding behaviour of the Judge and in the manner the Judge has proceeded in the case to the Registrar General whereupon the explanation was sought from the Judge which is available on record.
:: 4 ::
Saqib Khan vs. Ravindra Suri W.P. Nos. 8104/2017 & 10012/2017
2. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondent.
3. After hearing, in my considered opinion, in the light of the order dated 05.11.2014 passed by this Court in W.P. No.14628/2014, the petitioner is required to deposit the rent otherwise his right to defend the eviction proceedings would be closed. Due to non-deposit of the entire amount, a review petition was filed before this Court. The same was also disposed of as per order dated 16.1.2015 further granting time to deposit the remaining amount of rent in two equal installments within a period of two months from the said order. In view of the foregoing, in my considered opinion, in a suit seeking eviction filed by the plaintiff against the defendant on various grounds, as per the orders of this Court, the amount of the rent is required to be deposited upto date as per the provisions of Section 13(1) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act.
4. I have also perused the record of the trial Court and the various complaints which are available on record and also the order rejecting application under Section 24 of CPC. After perusal, it is suffice to observe that if a party looses trust and confidence in dispensation of justice from a particular Court, the Judge himself has to requise the case in place of dealing the same. In addition, if an application under Section 24 is filed, in place of dealing that case taking practical view, such case may be transferred on administrative side by the District & Sessions Judge to any other competent Court, not always, but looking to the facts :: 5 ::
Saqib Khan vs. Ravindra Suri W.P. Nos. 8104/2017 & 10012/2017 in which the complaint has been received even upto Registrar General.
5. In view of the foregoing circumstances, invoking the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, I deem it appropriate to pass the following orders :-
(1) In view of the order passed by this Court on 5.11.2014 in W.P. No.14628/2014 and the order passed in Review Petition No.02/2015 on 16.1.2015, it is directed that the defendant shall deposit the entire amount of rent within a month from the date of pronouncement of the order. It is further directed that the defendant shall continue to pay the rent on month to month basis on or before 15th day of every month. (2) In case of failure to comply the order passed today within the time so specified, the right to defend the case shall automatically stand closed.
(3) In case the rent has been deposited within a month, as directed hereinabove, the application under Order 9 Rule 7 of the CPC filed by the defendant shall be allowed by the trial Court without going to the technicalities and the parties be allowed to proceed in the suit in accordance with law. (4) The District & Sessions Judge, Bhopal on receiving the copy of this order shall assign the case to some other competent Court on administrative side to decide the same in accordance with law.
:: 6 ::
Saqib Khan vs. Ravindra Suri W.P. Nos. 8104/2017 & 10012/2017 (5) On the event of allowing the application under Order 9 Rule 7 of CPC, the trial Court shall proceed to decide the suit as early as possible not later than nine months from the date of assignment of the case by the District & Sessions Judge to any other Court. (6) The record of the Civil Suit received to this Court be immediately transmitted by the Registry thereby it should have reached to District & Sessions Judge, Bhopal on or before 10.9.2018.
(7) Parties are directed to appear before District & Sessions Judge, Bhopal on the said date thereafter on assignment of the case, they shall appear to the Court concerned without any notice. With the aforesaid observations, both these petitions stand disposed of.
(J.K. Maheshwari) Judge PK Digitally signed by PARITOSH KUMAR Date: 2018.08.30 18:26:03 +05'30'