IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.3111 of 2010 SHAIL KUMAR SINGH @ SHAIL KUMAR @ SHAILESH KUMAR S/O ABADH BIHARI ROY, R/O VILL.- BHALUAHI, P.O. SRAW, P.S. NATWAR (DINARA), DISTT.- ROHTAS, PRESENTLY RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- MAHARAJA HATA, P.S. ARRAH NAWADA, DISTT.- BHOJPUR…………………..DEFENDANT-PETITIONER VERSUS SMT. DEEP JHARO DEVI W/O ABADH BIHARI ROY R/O VILL.- BHALUAHI, P.S. NATWAR (DINARA), DISTT.- ROHTAS, PRESENTLY R/O MOHALLA MAHARAJA HATA, P.S. ARRAH NAWADA, DISTT.- BHOJPUR…….PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT For the petitioner : M/s Bindhyachal Singh and Md. Ataul Haque, Advocates. For the State : None. ----------- 02/ 18.08.2010 Heard leaned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 23.01.2010 passed in Eviction Suit No.01 of 2005 by which Subordinate Judge-I, Bhojpur rejected the application of defendant-petitioner to make the aforesaid eviction suit filed by the sole plaintiff-respondent analogous to Title Suit No.259 of 2005 filed by the defendant-petitioner. 3. It is quite apparent that the eviction suit has been filed by the plaintiff-respondent for eviction of the defendant- petitioner on the basis of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, whereas the title suit has been filed by the petitioner against the respondent for declaration of his title over the premises including the suit premises. In an eviction suit the question of title has to be gone incidentally and the main question in issue is the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and the definition of landlord is specifically given in section 2(f) of the Bihar Building (Lease, - 2 - Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 according to which the landlord may not necessarily be the owner of the suit premises. 4. In the said circumstances, there is no occasion for making the eviction suit analogous to the title suit specially when the eviction suit has to be decided expeditiously and the title suit dealing with the question of title will have to take some time. In the said circumstances, the impugned order of the court below is legal and proper and this writ petition is absolutely frivolous and misconceived. Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed. 5. However, the court below is directed to dispose of Eviction Suit No.01 of 2005 expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)