RANJIT KUMAR CHOUDHURY Vs. GOPEESH CHAKRAVARTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure which the petitioner has challenged the Judgment dated 2.11.89 passed by the learned Assistant: District Judge, Karimganj in title appeal No. 16 of 1986 reversing an order [passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1 Karimganj in title Suit No. 188/84.

(2.) The facts in a nutshell are as follows : The opposite party as plaintiff had filed a suit against the petitioner/defendant in the Court of learned Munsiff No. 1, Karimganj being title: Suit No. 188/84 praying for eviction and recovery of rent on the ground of defaulter and bonafide requirement The defendant was one of the sons of one Raj Kumar Choudhury the original tenant who had died in the year 1969 leaving behind his widow two daughters and two sons.

(3.) The defendant appeared and filed the written statement and contested the suit both on points of law and an facts. The defendant denied that he was a defaulter or that the property was required for bonafide purposes. The defendants further submitted that the suit was not maintainable in the present form due to defect of parties. The suit was heard by the learned Munsiff who framed four issues relating to the defaulter/bonafide requirement and defect of parties. The issue No. 4 was as follows : Whether the suit is bad for defect of parties. The suit was heard and parties produced the witnesses and exibited several documents. Finally the learned Munsiff decreed the suit only for recovery of rent of Rs. 245/- but did not grant any other relief as claimed by the plaintiff. It held that the suit was bad for defect of parties as all the legal heirs/representatives of the original tenant the deceased late Raj Kr. Choudhury, who had acquired heritable title to the said property were not' made parties to the suit. The trial Court held that the case of bonafide requirement was not proved. The plaintiff did not succeed on the ground of defaulter as well before the said Munsiff. The Munsiff however permitted the plaintiff to withdraw the money deposited with the Treasury on account of rent. As such the learned Munsiff decreed the suit for Rs. 245/- and granted no other relief to the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed from the Judgment before the Assistant District Judge, Karimganj. The District Judge heard the appeal and allowed the same on contest. The District Judge set aside the Judgment of the lower Court and allowed prayer for eviction of the plaintiff by an order dated 2.11.89. The District Judge held that in view of the registered agreement dated 2.12.1970 between the landlord and the said Ranjit Kr. Choudhury the defendant has become the sole tenant of the said premises and since he has defaulted in making payment of rent he was a defaulter and as such the plaintiff was entitled to get khas possession of the property.