IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20697 of 2011 Prakash Anand & Anr Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ---------------------------------- 06. 12.12.2011. Heard the learned senior counsel Mr. R. S. Rai on behalf of the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the tenants petitioners against the appellate judgment and decree dated 7.3.2011 passed by District Judge, Buxar in Title Appeal No. 99 of 2010 whereby it has been held that the appeal filed by the tenant against the decree of eviction on the ground of personal necessity alone is not maintainable. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners against the trial courts eviction decree, have filed Civil Revision No. 62 of 2011 and the petitioners had also filed Title Appeal No. 99 of 2010. The civil revision filed against the eviction decree is pending before the High Court Admittedly, Eviction Suit No. 3 of 2004 was filed by the respondents against the petitioners only on the ground of personal necessity and the said suit was decreed. The trial court passed the eviction decree against the petitioners. Section 14 sub Section 8 of the Bihar (Building, Lease and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 clearly provides that no appeal or second appeal shall lie against an order for recovery of possession. Considering this provision the 2 appellate court held that the appeal is not maintainable. In my opinion, therefore, the petitioners have rightly filed the civil revision before this court being Civil Revision No. 62 of 2011 which is still pending. In such view of the matter, the order passed by the lower appellate court holding that the title appeal was not maintainable cannot be interfered with in supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India as appeal was not maintainable before the Court below. Therefore, I find no jurisdiction error and thus, this writ application is dismissed. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)