BANWALI MAHTO Vs. JAGDISH CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the plaintiff arises out of the judgment of reversal passed in a suit for eviction and arrear of rent. It was filed on the grounds of personal necessity, default in making payment of rent and material deterioration in the condition of building.

(2.) The defendant entered appearance in the suit and filed written statement denying all the three grounds for eviction. The trial Court recorded all the three findings against the plaintiff, but decreed the suit on the ground that Buildings Control Act was not in force at the time when the suit was filed and the decree was passed by the trial Court. As such, the plaintiff who had served notice Under Sec. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act was entitled to get a decree for eviction and it was not necessary for him to prove any of the grounds because proving of these grounds was protection to a tenant under the Buildings Control Act.

(3.) Against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the defendant preferred an appeal and the lower appellate Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and dismissed the suit for eviction holding that the Buildings Control Act has come into force with retrospective effect. Therefore, the protection of Buildings Control Act as available to the tenant -defendant and consequently the trial Court committed an error of law in decreeing the suit.