IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11909 of 2011 Sanjeev Tiwari Versus Ramdeo Singh Yadav ----------- 02. 27.07.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This writ application has been filed against the order dated 26.05.2011 passed in Eviction Suit No.3 of 2006 by Munsif Ist, Munger whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for stay the present eviction suit till the disposal of Title Suit No.19 of 2000 pending in the Court of Sub Judge IInd, Munger has been rejected. Earlier, the application was rejected by the Court below by terms of order dated 22.06.2010. Against the said order, the petitioner filed C.W.J.C. No.12327 of 2010. On 20.01.2011, this Court recorded the grievance of the petitioner that the order passed by the Court below does not notice the full facts of the case relevant for adjudication of the controversy under Section 10 C.P.C. and noticing this grievance, the petitioner was directed to approach the Court below. Thereafter, another application has been filed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By the impugned Order, the learned Court below has given detail facts of the case and also given reasoning for not staying the subsequent eviction suit which has been filed under the B.B.C. Act. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Court below erroneously rejected the application because the petitioner is challenging the title of the plaintiff-respondent over the suit property and the suit being Title Suit No.19 of 2000 has been filed by the plaintiff-respondent for restraining the plaintiff of this eviction suit from forcefully evicting the petitioner. The learned counsel further submitted that the learned Court below rejected the application on erroneous grounds. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below has already considered all these points which has been raised before this Court. Sufficiency or inadequacy or otherwise of the reasoning or grounds mentioned by the Court below cannot be examined in the writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The Court below has assigned reasons for not staying the eviction suit. Moreover, this suit is under Special Act and it is not a case that the Court below has acted in utter disregard of any law. Accordingly, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Thus, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)