DASO DEVI Vs. BEGAM ROOHI ABBAS ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Arun Bihari Mathur for the appellants, and Mr. Abbas Haider for the respondents. The defendants are the appellants against a judgment of reversal. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 8.5.1995, passed by the learned 10th Additional District Judge, Patna, in Title Appeal No. 39 of 1988 (Begam Ruhi Abbas Ali and Ors. vs. Sita Ram Halwai), whereby he has reversed the judgment and decree dated 12.2.1988, passed by the learned Munsif, Patna City, in Title Suit No. 50 of 1978 (Begam Roohi Abbas and Ors. vs. Sita Ram Halwai). It arises out of an eviction suit and the property in question is a premises on the main road of the area known as Mohalla -Gujari, RS. Khajekala, which is part of the township of Patna City. The original defendant (Sita Ram Halwai) died during the pendency of the present appeal and has been substituted by his widow, son and four daughters.

(2.) ACCORDING to the findings recorded by the learned court of appeal below, plaintiff no.1 had inducted the original defendant as a tenant in the year 1958 on a monthly rental of Rs. 12.00 which is on the main road. The defendant set up a shop for preparation and sale of eatables including Jalebi. The rent was Rs. 40.00 per month on the date of institution of the suit. The learned trial court dismissed the suit. The learned court of appeal below has set aside the impugned judgment and decreed the suit and has ordered for ejectment of the defendants. There has been some dispute about the area of the rented premises. The learned court of appeal below found that it measures 18 ' long x 10 ' to 12 ' wide. Equivalent Citation:2007 -PLJR -1 -31

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. After hearing counsel for the parties at length on a number of days continuously, and after conclusion of the arguments on 12.9.2006, learned counsel for the plaintiffs made an offer to the defendants that they will have no objection to the continuance of the defendants on the same terms and conditions, for a period of six months provided they handover vacant possession of the suit premises without the necessity of execution proceedings. The matter was, therefore, adjourned for today to enable the learned counsel for the defendants to seek instructions in the matter. He submits on instructions that the defendants are prepared to vacate the premises if they are allowed to continue for a little longer time and on the terms and conditions fixed by this Court.