CRP 271/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY This revision petition is directed against the order dated 31.5.2010 passed by t he learned Munsiff No.1, Kamrup in Title Suit No.246/1998 (renumbered as 88/2006 ) whereby and whereunder the witness from the Bank was not allowed to be examine d although he was summoned. I have heard Mr. D Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. BR Dey, learn ed senior counsel appearing for the sole respondent. It appears that Title Suit No. 88/2006 has been filed by the present petitioner, as plaintiff, against the present respondent, as defendant, praying for permane nt injunction restraining the respondent from dispossessing her from the tenante d premises described in Schedule C to the plaint till she is evicted therefrom u nder due process of law, contending that the petitioner though is a tenant under the defendant/respondent there is an attempt made to disposes her from the ten anted premises without following the due process of law. The learned counsel for the parties have submitted that after filing of the said suit another suit has been filed by the respondent, as plaintiff, being Title S uit No. 327/2002, which was renumbered as Title Suit No. 548/2006 for eviction o f the present petitioner, who is the defendant in the said suit, from the tenant ed premises, which suit is presently pending. The learned counsel for the parties, therefore, have submitted that the cause in Title Suit No.88/2006 does not survive as the landlord, who is the respondent i n the present proceeding, has already filed the suit for eviction of the present petitioner from the tenanted premises. Mr. Dey, learned senior counsel further submits that till the decree is passed i n the suit filed by the respondent herein being Title Suit No. 548/2006 naturall y the present petitioner would not be disturbed in her possession. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that, in view of the su bmission of the learned counsel for the respondent, the petitioner shall file ap plication for withdrawal of the suit, if the respondent, during pendency of Titl e Suit No.548/2006 does not disturb the possession of the petitioner. Keeping in view the aforesaid position, the present revision petition is dispose d of with the direction to the learned court below to allow the present petition er to withdraw Title Suit No.88/2006, in the event of filing appropriate applica tion for withdrawal. It is, however, made clear that till the disposal of the Title Suit No. 548/2006 the possession of the present petitioner in respect of the tenanted premises sh all not be disturbed. The revision petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.