HIRA LAL PRASAD Vs. SATYA NARAIN MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Defendant has filed this civil revision application against the order dated 8.12.1993 passed in Eviction Suit No. 8/89, whereby the amendment petition filed by the Plaintiff has been allowed.

(2.) The Plaintiff filed the eviction suit for eviction of the Defendant from the shop (suit premises) on the ground of personal necessity and also for default in payment of rent. The case of the Plaintiff was that there was a Pucca shop and a thatched shop on, Plot No. 205. He took Rs. 30,000/- from the Defendant for construction of the shop and for giving the same to the Defendant. The Defendant was inducted tenant of both the shops on a monthly rental of Rs. 90/- and 60/- respectively on 1.10.83. The Defendant paid rent till August, 1988 and thereafter he stopped payment of rent from the month of September, 1988. In the plaint it was also stated that he required the suit premises for business by his grandsons who are sitting idle after finishing their studies. The Defendant on demand refused to pay the rent as well as to vacate the suit premises.

(3.) The Defendant appeared in the suit and denied the allegation made in the plaint. His stand was that Plot No. 205, the suit, premises, belonged to the Plaintiff and it was a Parti land. He approached the Plaintiff for letting out the suit premises which was agreed upon by the Plaintiff and the said vacant land was let out to the Plaintiff on a monthly rental of Rs. 50/-. He also advanced Rs. 10,000/- and subsequently on demand Rs. 20,000/- for the purpose of construction of a shop to the Plaintiff. Thereafter the shop was constructed and was let out to the Defendant with an assurance that the entire amount would be adjusted towards the monthly rent of the suit premises.