D.G.R. Patnaik, J.-The present appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 11.1.2005 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Hazaribagh dismissing five Title Appeals filed against the judgment dated 31.3.1989 and its corresponding decree dated 10.4.1989 passed by the Sub-Ordinate Judge, Hazaribagh commonly in five separate Eviction Suits which were tried analogously alongwith one inter-pleader suit. Since questions of law involved in all these appeals are common, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Litigation in these appeals has a chequered history. The respondents Rupchand Jain, Sumerchand Jain and Dhirendra Kumar Jain filed individual eviction suits under the Rent Control Act pray- ing for eviction of their respective tenants from the suit premises, on the ground of default in payment of monthly rents. Their claim was that the property constituting the suit premises in each suit was purchased by them by virtue of six separate registered sale deeds dated 28.5.1979 from the previous owners. Defendants in each of the eviction suits were the original tenants under the erstwhile owners and used to pay rent to them. After purchase of the properties, the plaintiffs as also the vendors had informed the tenants about the transfer of the suit properties in favour of the plaintiffs. On such information. defendants/tenants, except the tenant Sardar Singh (defendant in Title Suit No. 14 of 1996), began paying rents to the plaintiffs. However, later, they stopped paying rents to the plaintiffs who therefore claimed default as cause of action for filing the suits for eviction.

3. Defendants in each of these eviction suits denied relationship of landlord and tenants between them and the plaintiffs and made counter claim that the suit properties were Khas Mahal Property and not the properties of the plaintiffs. Raising such controversy, the defendants applied before the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum House Rent Controller under Section 19(2) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act. 1982 on 30.6.1979 seeking an order to deposit the monthly rents in the Government Treasury. The Sub-Divisional Officer vide his order dated 20.8.1979 directed the defendants/tenants to deposit their respective monthly rents in the Treasury and in pursuance thereof, the defendants deposited the monthly rents in the Treasury. The defendants contended that in such view of the matter they cannot be said to have defaulted in payment of rents.

Equipped with the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, the defendants/tenants joined together and filed an inter-pleader suit bearing Title Suit No. 52 of 1983 impleading the State of Bihar and the Khas Mahal Authorities as defendants no. 1 to 3 as one set and the three plaintiffs/purchasers of the suit property, as defendants no. 4 to 6 second set. The plea taken by the plaintiffs in the inter-pleader suit was that they being the tenants in respect of the suit premises pertaining to the individual eviction suits, seek declaration from the court as to which of the two sets of the defendants are the owners/ landlord of the suit premises, entitled to receive rents from them.

In the inter-pleader suit, one of the plaintiffs/tenants Peer Mohammad preferred a prayer for injunction to restrain the plaintiffs of Title (Eviction) Suit No. 1 of 1983 from proceeding with the eviction suit filed against him. Learned Munsif, Hazaribagh rejected the prayer for injunction by order dated 21.12.1983. Against this order, the tenant Peer Mohammad preferred Misc. Appeal No.6 of 1984(R) before the Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench. The Misc. Appeal was dismissed in terms of the order dated 16.11.1984 but with a direction that the Title suit No. 1 of 1983, which was originally filed in the Court of Munsif, be transferred to the Court of Sub-ordinate Judge, Hazaribagh and both the suits namely Title (Eviction) Suit No. 1 of 1983 and inter-pleader suit being Title Suit No. 52 of 1983. be heard analog