Suits can remain maintainable despite statutory appeal provisions if they involve violations of justice or jurisdiction.

ORDER

This Civil Revision, under Section 115 of CPC, has been filed against order dated 30.09.2013 passed by IV Additional District Judge, District Bhind (M.P.) in Civil Suit No.21A/2013, by which an application filed by applicants under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been rejected.

2. Facts necessary for disposal of present revision, in short, are that the State of Madhya Pradesh has filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction as well as for setting aside auction proceedings as well as declaring the Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND sale deed dated 19.10.2006 as null and void. It is the case of respondent No.1/plaintiff that plaintiff is the owner and was in possession of Araji 6 and 13 area 30,000 sq.ft. of land situated in Village Kohar, Tahsil Mehgaon, District Bhind (M.P.). Plots were allotted to various beneficiaries for establishing Industries. However, ownership of the plots remained with the Industrial Department of the State of Madhya Pradesh. The plots were allotted on the conditions mentioned in the allotment order. By order dated 14.12.1977 passed in appeal No.74, Aaraji No.6 and 13 (Plot No.8) was allotted to M/s. Sharda Rice and Ramsiya Sharma, Ramsharan Sharma, and Ashok Dantare for establishment of industry. The aforesaid plot which was in the ownership of plaintiff was leased out to Ramsharan Sharma, Ramsiya Sharma and Ashok Dantare for a period of 30 years and accordingly lease deed dated 16.12.1977 was issued. In contravention of condition of lease deed, defendant Nos.6-8 mortgaged the said plot with State Bank of Indore and obtained loan. As per condition No. 19 of the lease deed, it was obligatory on the part of allottee to continuously run the business. However, the said condition was also violated by defendants No.6- 8. Defendants No.6- 8 closed down the business. As a result, District Business and Industrial Centre, Malanpur, District Bhind (M.P.) by order dated 11.04.2001 set aside the allotment order and also cancelled the lease deed. Defendants No.6 to 8 preferred an appeal before Commissioner, Industries, Secretariat and by order dated 17.08.2007, the Commissioner, Industries, dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, notices were issued to defendants No.6- 8 to hand over the vacant possession of the plot to the plaintiff. After the notice period was over, proceedings were initiated seeking eviction under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, which are pending in the Court of SDO (R), Mehgaon, District Bhind (M.P.). It is further pleaded that the plot in question was Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANAND leased out to defendants No.6- 8 for establishment of industry. However, defendants No.6- 8 took loan by mortgaging the plot to the State Bank of Indore. Later on the State Bank of Indore merged in the State Bank of India. Since the borrower (defendants No.6- 8) did not repay the loan, therefore, the bank initiated recovery proceedings. Plaintiff was not made a party to the recovery proceedings which were conducted by the DRT. The plot in question was put for auction and the plot which was in the ownership of plaintiff was also auctioned. No communication of auction was ever sent by appellant or by the DRT to the State of M.P. Since the plot was in the ownership of the plaintiff, therefore, the DRT had no authority to auction the plot and thus, it was claimed that auction proceedings, be declared as null and void to the rights and title of plaintiff. It was further claimed that defendant No.5 was successful bidder in the auction and illegally obtained the sale certificate. Thereafter, he illegally alienated the property to defendants No.1 to 4. It is the claim of plaintiff that once the auction proceedings are illegal, then no right or title stood transferred in favour of defendants No.1 to 4 and therefore even d