JUDGMENT :

LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 341 Cr.P.C. is filed aggrieved by the rejection of I.A. (SR) No. 2037 of 2021 in O.S. No. 69 of 2017, vide order dated 02.07.2021 by the learned III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Courts at Hyderabad.

2. Appellant is defendant and Respondent No. 1 is plaintiff in the suit. For convenience sake, parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed in the suit.

3. Plaintiff filed the suit for eviction of defendant from the suit schedule property and for recovery of arrears of rent of Rs.79,63,802/- and damages at Rs.5,00,000/- per month from 23.12.2016 till handing over vacant possession of suit schedule property. In the said suit, defendant filed the subject I.A. to charge plaintiff and commit the matter to the Metropolitan Magistrate Court concerned to prosecute plaintiff for filing false statements under oath in affidavit, deposition and plaint and initiate proceedings for perjury for infringement of rights and harassment using the Court as a tool. Defendant claims that facts mentioned in the suit by plaintiff are contrary to his own statements. It is stated that plaintiff obtained crores of rupees as loan from Bank of India by depositing the title deeds of subject property ‘under Memorandum of deposit of title deeds by constructive delivery’ and further, suit schedule property remained with bank as collateral security for securing the due repayment and discharge by company to bank by a registered company in the name and style of M/s Team Universal Infratech Private Limited and the bank informed defendant that plaintiff obtained loan on false representation. It is stated that plaintiff has no right over the property as he had given declaration that suit schedule property is not subject matter of any suit or legal proceeding nor any attachment before judgment nor has any trust secret or otherwise been created in respect of the said properties. It is stated that as per the conditions of agreement with bank, plaintiff shall not enter into any kind of agreement or not even enter any lease agreement nor he can file a case on the subject property. It is also stated that defendant paid rents up to date and no amount is due and payable and further advance rents are lying with plaintiff. It is further stated that the present I.A. was filed in the pending case to bring to the notice of the Court the above facts. The said I.A. was rejected vide order impugned by the learned Judge stating that at the fag end of the case after orders and directions of the Hon’ble High Court in Civil Revision Petition No. 753 of 2021, the present Application was filed which exhibits the conduct of defendant and further, it had not complied with the orders in Civil Revision Petition No. 759 of 2020.

4. At the outset, it is to be noted that questioning the very maintainability of the Appeal, Registry has taken an objection which reads as under:

“As verified from the material, WPSR No. 20458 of 2021 was filed earlier with the same relief sought for in the above Criminal Appeal(SR) and on the Office objections, the matter was placed before the Hon’ble Court before which the matter was sought to be withdrawn and while cautioning the learned counsel for the petitioner to be more careful in future before filing such untenable petitions invoking the powers of Judicial Review of the Court, leave as prayed for was granted (order at material page No. 24). Further, as verified from the material filed the suit itself was disposed of (order at material page No. 33) against which appeal suit can be filed with the grounds urged herein.

In view of the above, please clarify how this Criminal Appeal is entertainable against the order dated 02.07.2021 in I.A. (SR) No. 69 of 2017 rejecting the Application filed under Section 340 Cr.P.C. without availing alternative remedy.”

5. Learned counsel for appellant resubmitted the Appeal stating that an Application under Section 340(1) Cr.P.C. can be filed even after con