SUBHASH THAWANI Vs. SRI RAI ATUL KRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present civil revision application under Section 14(8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (in short "the Act"), questioning the validity and legality of the judgment and decree dated 30.5.2009 passed in Eviction Suit No. 3 of 2005 by learned Execution Munsif, Patna decreeing the suit brought by the plaintiff-opposite party herein for eviction on the ground of personal necessity in terms of Section 11(1)(c) of the Act.

(2.) Before coming to the factual backdrop of the present case, it would be relevant to mention here that originally against the instant impugned judgment dated 30.5.2009 passed in aforesaid Eviction Suit No. 3 of 2005, C.R. No. 1896 of 2009 was filed by one Krishna Bihari Ojha claiming himself to be the holder of power of attorney of present petitioner-Subhash Thawani. In that Civil Revision No. 1896 of 2009, Plaintiff Sri Rai Atul Krishna was impleaded as opposite party 1st Set and defendant Shri Subhash Thawani (the present petitioner) was impleaded as opposite party 2nd set. However, on the objection raised on behalf of the plaintiff- opposite party 1st set. regarding maintainability of that civil revision application at the instance of a third person, namely, Krishna Bihari Ojha, aforesaid civil revision application was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 17.2.2010 passed by a Bench of this Court with a liberty to file a fresh properly constituted civil revision application by the defendant- judgment debtor-Subhash Thawani (the present petitioner).

(3.) In the light of aforesaid order dated 17.2.2010 passed in C.R. No. 1896 of 2009, the present civil revision application was filed on 1.4.2010 by the present petitioner, who was admittedly defendant in the Eviction Suit No. 3 of 2005. In view of the fact that present civil revision application was barred by limitation, I.A. No. 3611 of 2010 was filed on behalf of the petitioner for condonation of delay of 246 days in the background set forth above, and after hearing the parties, a Bench of this Court by an order dated 28.10.2010 has allowed the aforesaid interlocutory application and has condoned the delay by a reasoned and speaking order. Thereafter, the matter was taken up and with the consent of the parties, was heard at length at the stage of admission itself for its final disposal.