BALRAM PRASAD AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed by the petitioner for restoration or possession of old holding No. 21 new 23, which situate in civil line Gaya, from which he has been dispossessed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate with the help of the police in pursuance of an order passed by the then District Magistrate, Gaya, Mrs. Raj Bala Verma. There is no dispute that respondent No. 9 is the landlord and the petitioner is a tenant and they are governed by the provision of the Bihar Building (Lease, nt and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) The landlord filed an eviction suit No. 6/1990 in the Civil Court for the eviction of the petitioner the said suit was dismissed by the Trial Court and was decreed by the appellate court on 21-7-1993. Therefore, respondent No. 9, the landlord, instead of pursuing the remedy under the Code of Civil Procedure approached the then District Magistrate, Gaya, and in pursuance of an order passed by her which has been communicated by the Addl. Collector to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, the decree holder was put in possession by the Executive Magistrate with the help of the police on 5-9-93. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid action of the respondents on the ground that under the law they have no power to remove the petitioner from the premises unless the decree holder are put in possession by the Civil Court in execution of the decree.

(3.) From the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent authorities it appears that they have admitted that they had handed over the possession to the decree-holder in pursuance of an order of the District Magistrate. However, they have tried to justify the order on the ground that they were under the impression that the decree of the appellate Court was being executed and there was some law and order problems caused by the tenant in giving delivery of possession.