UDAY NARAYAN GUPTA Vs. BIJAY KUMAR KESHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the Learned Counsel, Mr. Harshwardhan Sahay, on behalf of the Petitioner and the Learned Counsel, Mr. Praveen Chandra Prasad, on behalf of the Respondent. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Plaintiff-Petitioner against the order dated 15.3.2011 passed by Munsif-IInd, Munger in Eviction Suit No. 5 of 2009 whereby the learned Court below rejected the application filed by the Petitioner under Section 15 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982.

(2.) The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the relationship of landlord and tenant has been admitted, by the Defendant-Respondent. He also admitted that he was paying rent at the rate of Rs. 410/- to Bijli Devi. However, on the death of Bijli Devi, when the Petitioner succeeded to the same as her legal heir, the Defendant-Respondent did not pay the rent. Hence the Petitioner filed the eviction suit. In spite of above admitted fact, the learned Court below rejected the application under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act on the ground that there is deed of agreement to sell the property by Bijli Devi in favour of Defendant. According to the Learned Counsel, the Defendant claimed that a deed of agreement was executed by Bijli Devi in her favour to sell the property in the year 1995, i.e., dated 3.12.1995 which' is unregistered deed. Mostt. Bijli Devi died on 10.12.2008 but during this period, the Defendant never filed any suit for specific performance of contract nor he obtained any registered sale deed rather he is only relying upon so-called unregistered deed of agreement dated 3.12.1995. In such view of the matter, the learned Court below gravely erred in not directing the Respondent to pay the rent of the suit premises arrears and current.

(3.) On the other hand, the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Defendant submitted that in the agreement itself, it has been mentioned that if no registered sale deed will be executed, the said agreement will be considered to be the sale deed and title will vest on the Defendant. Therefore, considering this document, the learned Court below has rightly rejected the application under Section 15 of the B.B.C. Act.