IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1550 of 2006 MD.IMTIAZ ALAM @ IMTIAZ ALAM Versus KHALIQUN NISHA ----------- 2 12.12.2008 In the opinion of this Court, the petitions filed by the petitioner on 7.6.2005 was only a device to delay the disposal of an eviction suit. The Court has given reasons which would indicate that the defendant–petitioner had already admitted the relationship of landlord-tenant between the plaintiff and himself in para-7 of the written statement. In that view of the matter when the Court has also found that the plaintiff was identified in course of her cross-examination by the petitioner himself before the Advocate Commissioner recording the evidence of the plaintiff, his entire effort to question the identification of the plaintiff and/or the adducing of evidence on the question of payment of rent can be nothing else but a filibusterous attitude which has been rightly rejected by the Court below. That being so, this Court would not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Accordingly, this Civil Revision application is dismissed. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)