ANIL KUMAR Vs. RAM AUTAR MODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiffs have filed this Second Appeal against the Judgment of reversal passed by the lower appellate Court in Eviction Appeal No.4 of 1995.

(2.) THE plaintiffs appellants field eviction suit No.51 of 1988 for the eviction of the defendant alleging that Ram Chandra Prasad, husband of the plaintiff, was the owner of the suit premises. The defendant was inducted as tenant in the suit premises mentioned in Schedule 'B' of the plaint and an agreement was executed on 30.05.1967 on a monthly rent of Rs.175/ -. The said tenancy was created for a period of 15 years from Ist February, 1968 without any provision of extension of tenancy. The period of lease deed expired on 01.05.1983 and thereafter, there was oral lease as monthly rent was enhanced to Rs.550/ -. The defendant used to pay the rent against the grant of rent receipt. The plaintiff is residing in the first floor of the suit premises along with her family members and the area is very small, therefore, the plaintiff requires the suit premises for residential purpose also. The two sons of the plaintiff have passed matriculation and are unemployed. They have enrolled themselves in employment exchange but still, they have not got any job. Therefore, the plaintiff want to settle the two sons in business. The plaintiff's husband is also a heart patient and had blood pressure who is an employee of L.I.C., Muzafarpur. The plaintiff desire that she will settle her two sons in business of hardware and general stores respectively. Because her husband is heart patient, therefore, he desires that he will live in the ground floor.

(3.) THE trial Court at paragraph 19 recorded the finding that AJit Kumar is jobless and he requires the suit premises for opening a general store. Thereafter, considering the partial eviction, the trial Court at paragraph 21 held that the suit premises is very big wherein the defendant is running a sweet meat shop and a general store and the plaintiff desire to open a general store, therefore, partial eviction will satisfy the need of the plaintiff. Accordingly, decreed the suit partially.