IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20714 of 2011 Balmiki Prasad Versus Smt.Rani Devi & Ors ---------------------------------- 02. 29.11.2011 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The defendant has filed this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 23.07.2011 passed by Munsif II, Munger in Eviction Suit No.4 of 2002 whereby the learned Court below rejected the application filed by the petitioner on 19.08.2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of this eviction suit, the petitioner was dispossessed from the suit premises on 15.08.2010 and, therefore, on 19.08.2010, this application was filed but the learned Court below illegally rejected the same. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is regularly depositing the rent of Rs.300 per month as directed under Section 15 of the Bihar Building(Lease, Rent and Eviction)Control Act, 1982 and still he is depositing the same. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below considered the case of the petitioner and the case of the plaintiff and came to the conclusion that in fact, the petitioner has abandoned the suit premises. According to the plaintiff also, the defendant has not been dispossessed rather 2 he has abandoned the suit premises. In view of the above finding recorded by the Court below, in supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Court cannot substitute its own finding contrary to the finding recorded by the Court below. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Thus, this writ application is dismissed. This disputed question of fact can only be decided after evidence which may be considered at the time of final hearing of the suit. Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)