MD KHALIQUZ ZAMAN Vs. H C JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-decree holder has challenged the impugned order dated 4th February, 1994 passed in Execution Case no. 7 of 1993, by Shri J.N.Jha, Munsif, Danapur.

(2.) BY the impugned order, the learned Munsif has dismissed the execution case aforesaid on the ground that there cannot be any execution with respect to an order passed under Section 5 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the B.B.C. Act) and thereby the execution case is not maintainable.

(3.) THE Controller after due notice and on hearing the parties has fixed a rent @ Rs. 1791/- per month giving the same effective from 26th of July, 1990 i.e.the date of filing of the case. The finding of the Controller is Annexure -1. The judgment debtor -opposite party filed" B.B.C. Appeal on 6th Februaty, 1991 before the Collector, Patna bearing B.B.C. Appeal No. 94 of 1991. Inspite of mandatory order for depositing arrears of rent and the month to month rent, at the rate fixed by the Controller, as provided under section 16 of the B.B.C. Act, the opposite party did not choose to deposit the same. Such order was passed by the learned Collector on 16th August, 1991. Thereafter the opposite party filed revision on 30th August, 1991 before the Commissioner, Patna Division, bearing B.B.C. Revision Case No. 92 of 1991. The same was also dismissed on 7th April, 1992 for non-compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 16 of the B.B.C. Act. The B.B.C. appeal was also dismissed by the Collector, Patna on 22nd of March, 1993. In the meantime, after decision of the Controller dated 22nd of January, 1991 (Annexure-1) and filing of the appeal by the opposite party before the Collector, the opposite party filed one Title Suit No. 63 of 1991. Curiously, in the said Title Suit, he denied the relationship of landlord and tenant and prayed for injunction to restrain the recovery of amount of rent fixed by the Controller. The same is pending.