ZENITH FORGELTD Vs. NILKANTH PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff-opposite party filed Eviction Suit No. 373 of 1989 against the defendant-petitioners for their eviction from the suit premises described in Schedule A to the plaint. According to the plaintiff, the defendants were inducted in the suit premises as tenant in the year 1979 and they continued as such till 8.9.1987. Thereafter on 9.9.1987 a registered lease was executed between the parties for a period of 24 months, commencing from 9.9.1987 and ending on 8.9.1989. Before expiry of the said lease, the defendants did not serve any notice to the plaintiff exercising their right conferred under Section 18 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act" for short) and after expiry of the lease on 8.9.1989 they did not vacate the house. The plaintiff sent a registered notice dated 3.10.1989 to the defendants requesting them to vacate the suit premises. But they did not vacate the same and, therefore, the plaintiff filed the suit for a decree for eviction under Section 11(1)(e) of the Act.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit. According to them, the suit premises was let out to the defendant No. 1 more or less 20 years back and from time to time the rate of rent was illegally enhanced by giving threats. In the year 1987 the plaintiff has by practising fraud and coercion got the lease deed registered for a fixed period of two years, though the defendant No. 1 continued to be month to month tenant. After expiry of the said period, the plaintiff started realising the rent from the defendants with clear understanding that they were accepted as month to month tenant. In the circumstances, the defendant No. 1 continued as a monthly tenant on payment of rent @ Rs. 1600/- per month and was not liable to vacate the suit premises under Section 11(1)(e) of the Act.

(3.) The trial court found that the defendants were tenants of the plaintiff for a fixed period and were not the monthly tenants and the plaintiff is entitled for eviction of the defendant No. l from the suit premises after expiry of the lease. Against the said judgment and decree, the defendants have preferred this Civil Revision application under Section 14(8) of the Act.