HIRALAL AGARWAL Vs. SOMITRA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision application under Section 14 (8) of the Bihar Buildings (lease, Rent and Eviction) Control, Act 1982 (here in after to be referred to as the 'Act') has been filed by the defendant-tenant against the judgment and decree dated 8-10-1991 passed in Eviction Suit No, 15 of 3990 by which the suit on the ground of personal necessity has been decreed.

(2.) It appears that the plaintiff the suit aforementioned on personal necessity for setting up business for his one of the grand-son, namely, Om Prakash Banshal, who was unemployed. The defendant, however contested the suit by taking leave of the Court and the learned Court below on the basis of the pleadings of the parties and evidence on records decreed the suit holding that the plaintiff required the premises reasonably and bonafidely for engaging his grand-sou, namely, Om Prakash Banshal.

(3.) Mr, Kameshwar Prasad. learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly assailed the judgment impugned on the ground that since the learned Trial Court has not recorded a finding on the question of partial eviction so far the need of the tenant is concerned, as per proviso to Section 11 (1) (c) of the Act, the judgment impugned is not sustainable in law.