The discretionary jurisdiction of the Court and the appealability of interlocutory orders under Section 104 read with Order 43, Rule 1 CPC.

S. K. KESHOTE, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties, perused the revision petition and the record of the suit out of this petition arises.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff respondent filed suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of the rent against the defendant petitioner in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) West, Jaipur city, Jaipur on 16-12-1991. The eviction of the defendant petitioner is claimed on the ground of default in payment of rent and reasonable and bona fide necessity of the suit premises. The written statement in the suit is filed on 31-10-1992. Issues are framed on 1-11-1996

( 3 ) THE case proceeded for the evidence of plaintiff repondent. On 21-8-1998, the plaintiff has completed his evidence and closed the same. As none was present for the defendant petitioner, the court has ordered to proceed ex parte against him. The suit was fixed for final arguments on 18-9-1998. On 18-9-1998 neither the defendant nor his Counsel was present. The learned trial court heard the arguments and the suit was fixed on 19-9-1998 for pronouncement of the judgment.

( 4 ) FROM the order sheet dated 19-9-1998 it transpires that after drawing of the proceedings on previous date an application came to be filed by the defendant under Order 9, Rule 7 read with Section 115 CPC. On 19-9-1998 the court has ordered to give the copy of the application to the counsel for the plaintiff resondent and the matter was fixed for reply to the application and hearing thereof on 22-9-1998. On 22-9-1998 this application of the defendant peititoner filed under Order 9, Rule 7 read with Section 115 CPC was rejected.

( 5 ) THIS revision application was presented on 23-12-1998. The defendant petitioner has challenged the order dated 22-9-1998 of the learned trial Court. The court fixed the suit for hearing on 24-9-1998 on the request of the defendant petitioner. The order sheet dated 22-9-1998 speaks that the case was adjourned on the request of the defendant petitioner.

( 6 ) ON 24-9-1998 an application came to be filed under Order 9, Rule 7 CPC and prayer is made therein that the order dated 21-8-1998 be recalled and the defendant petitioner be given opportunity to cross examine the plaintiffs witnesses and to produce his defence. The reply to that application has been filed by the plaintiff petitioner. This application came to be rejected by the court below under its order dated 21-1-1999. In this order the date has wrongly been mentioned as 21-8-1999. The order dated 21-1-1999 of the trial Court has not been challenged by the defendant petitioner.

( 7 ) THE second application filed by the defendant petitioner has been rejected, but this fact has not been brought to the notice of the court either by filing an affidavit or otherwise. This important fact has been concealed by the petitioner from the Court. When this fact has been brought to the notice of the Court during the course of arguments by the counsel for the non-petitioner, the record was called and on perusal thereof what it is stated by the counsel for the respondent is found correct. Under section 115 of the CPC it is a discretionary jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the matter or may not. Where the litigant does not come before the Court with clean hands or conceal the material facts, it may be a good ground to decline to interfere in the matter and not to grant any relief to that litigant under its discretionary powers. The application filed on 24-9-1998 has been dismissed is irrelevant and immaterial fact in this matter.

( 8 ) THERE is yet another conduct of the defendant petitioner in the proceedings before the learned trial Court on which also he disentitles himself from getting any relief from the Court under its discretionary jurisdiction. The defendant petitioner is a tenant and he made all the attempts to delay the trial of the suit.

( 9 ) THE order to proceed ex parte has been made on 21-8-1998. The matter was fixed on 18-9-1998. During this period no atte