JUDGMENT :

This writ petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 02.07.2013 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-V, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 03 of 1998 on the petition filed by plaintiffs (respondents herein) under Section 15 of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, by which it was held the defendant-original writ petitioner is liable to pay the rent at the rate of agreed rate i.e. Rs. 1908/- per month for all shops and further directed to deposit the arrear rent @ Rs. 1908/- per month from the month of December, 1994 till date with further direction to deposit current rent of every month at the same rate by 15th of succeeding month, as the defendant had raised objection regarding the status of the plaintiffs as his landlord, which is to be decided in the suit, it was ordered that the said deposited rent shall not be withdrawn till disposal of the suit or any other order passed by this Court; and also for quashing order dated 24.08.2013 by which defence of the petitioner has been struck off.

2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition read as under:

The respondents-plaintiffs filed a suit being Title Suit No. 17 of 1988 for declaration of title over the scheduled property and for confirmation of possession over the same. The defendant-original writ petitioner appeared and filed written statement. The suit was decreed vide order dated 31.07.1997 against the defendant-writ petitioner. Against the said judgment, the defendant-writ petitioner filed a petition, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 1 of 1997, before Sub Judge – V, Dhanbad under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was dismissed vide order dated 14.11.1997. Thereafter, he filed M.A. Case No. 72 of 1997, which was also dismissed vide order dated 19.08.1998. Aggrieved thereof, he filed revision before the High Court being Civil Revision No. 423 of 1998(R), which was dismissed vide order dated 16.07.2001, against which the petitioner filed Special Leave Petition No. 19184 of 2001, which was dismissed on 23.11.2001.

The petitioner, thereafter, filed appeal being Title Appeal No. 72 of 2001 before the learned District Judge, which was dismissed on 20.12.2001 on the ground of limitation, against which the petitioner filed Second Appeal No. 180 of 2002, which was admitted on 09.11.2004 and is pending for final hearing.

It was the case of the writ petitioner before the Court below that since the right, title and interest over the suit premises is still to be decided by the Hon’ble High Court, it cannot be said that the petitioner is tenant of the respondents.

It has further been stated that after the decree and judgment dated 31.07.1997 in Title Suit No. 17 of 1988, the plaintiffs-respondents filed Title (Eviction) Suit No. 3 of 1998 against the defendant-petitioner claiming the ownership of the shop rooms and the rent. The defendant petitioner appeared in suit and filed written statement denying any relationship of landlord and tenant between 4 the respondents and the petitioner under the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act.

In the Eviction suit, the plaintiffs-respondents filed a petition under Section 15 of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act [herein after referred to as “Act”] on 16.08.1999 with a prayer that arrears of rent may be deposited by the petitioner, against which a rejoinder was filed by the defendant-petitioner on 27.09.1999. The Court after hearing the parties rejected the said petition vide order dated 01.12.2005. It is alleged that against the said order the respondents did not do anything up-to 2007 and on 21.07.2007 filed another petition under Section 15 of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act for the same relief, which was rejected vide order dated 21.12.2010. Thereafter, the plaintiffs respondents filed another petition under Section 15 of the Jharkhand B