IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.1194 of 2008 BABU LAL SAH @ LAL BABU, S/O Sri Ram Lakhan Sah, resident of Village- Sirhully, P.S.-Kamtaul, District-Darbhanga, at present posted as Headmaster, Government Primary School, Community Development Block, Kewati, District- Darbhanga. ----Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Bihar. 2. The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi, District-Sitamarhi. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi, District-Sitamarhi. 4. The Officer-in-charge of Sitamarhi, P.O. & P.S. & District- Sitamarhi. 5. Nagendra Choudhary, S/O Late Suraj Choudhary, resident of Mohalla- Pratap Nagar, Ward No. 22, Mehsaul Road, P.O. & P.S., District- Sitamarhi. 6. Smt. Anjali Jaiswal, W/O Nagendra Choudhary, resident of Mohalla- Pratap Nagar, Ward No. 22, Mehsaul Road, P.O. & P.S. District- Sitamarhi. 7. Hira Paswan, S/O Late Phulgen Paswan, resident of Village- Murliya Dih, P.S.Bajpatti, District- Sitamarhi…..Respondents. ----------- 3. 23.04.2009. Under this application, the petitioner prays for a direction to the private respondent no.5, Nagendra Choudhary for unlocking the house and hand over its possession to the petitioner. Petitioner’s case is that the petitioner was a tenant of respondent no.5 and he was paying rent regularly. It is also stated in the petition that the petitioner had spent of Rs. 10,000/- in repairing/improvement of the house and that amount was to be returned to the petitioner at the time of eviction or it was to be adjusted in the rent payable. It is also the case of the petitioner that out of the dues of rent, a sum of Rs.5400/-was paid to the respondent no.5 on 29.01.2004 by a Demand Draft and that remaining arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 16450/- was agreed to be paid by 30.06.2005 with an agreement that if it was not paid, the petitioner will vacate the house. The petitioner raises a dispute about the agreement for payment - 2 - of arrears of Rs. 16450/- and he says that due to non-payment of this rent the petitioner was ousted from the house. The petitioner also states in his petition that the respondent no.5 Nagendra Choudhary has also filed a Eviction Suit No. 9 of 2005 against the petitioner on 27.09.2005 which is still pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that the case is pending. It is also stated that regarding ousting of the petitioner from the house, petitioner’s wife had filed a complaint case under Complaint Case No.244 of 2006 but it is submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that the complaint has been dismissed.’ The petitioner seeks relief from this court by way of a direction to the respondent no.5 to unlock the house and handed over its possession to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that when a civil litigation under eviction suit is already pending before the civil court, the petitioner has all opportunities to approach that court for seeking relief by way of restitution because during pendency of the eviction suit no one can be evicted except with the order of the court. It is also submitted that admittedly there is dues regarding the arrears of rent and the petitioner disputes those dues which can be decided by the civil court only under the said eviction suit. In such view of the matter, I feel that this petition as been filed in shape of the criminal writ application is misconceived, therefore, it is dismissed as such. The petitioner should seek his remedy before the civil court where eviction suit is pending. U.K. (C.M. Prasad,J)