ANIL KUMAR TEKRIWAL Vs. NAVIN CHANDRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for both the sides.

(2.) This revision -petition is directed against an order dated 28.7.1995 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, . Godda, in Title Appeal No. 3 of 1995, whereby the has negatived the prayer of the petitioners (Respondents in the appeal) to hold that the appeal was not maintainable in view of the provisions of Section 14 (8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (for short "the Act").

(3.) The order has been passed in the following back grounds: the petitioners instituted Title (Eviction) Suit No. 2 of 1990 praying for eviction of the opposite party (defendant in the suit), on the ground of personal necessity, from the suit, premises. During the course of the proceeding of the suit, a written statement had been filed by the Opposite Party on 15.5.1991 and thereafter issues were also framed and till that stage no petition seeking leave with affidavit as contemplated by Sub -section (4) of Section 14 of the Act had been obtained by the opposite party. Subsequently on 3.8.1991 the opposite party filed petition as also an affidavit praying for allowing him leave to contest the suit on the ground mentioned in the affidavit and that leave was granted. Thereafter, the hearing of the suit proceeded and the trial court eventually decreed the suit and ordered the opposite party to vacate the suit premises within sixty days from the date of passing of the order. Against that order/decree which was passed on 31.3.1995, the opposite party preferred an appeal bearing Title Appeal No. 3 of 1995 in which the impugned order was passed, whereby the objection regarding non -maintainability of the appeal raised by the petitioners has been negative by the learned Appellate Court. The main reason given by the learned Appellate Court for over ruling the objection raised about non -maintainability of the appeal in view of the provision of Sections 14 (8) of the Act, is that 'special procedure', that has been prescribed by Sub -sections (4), (5), (6) and (7) of Section 14 of the Act was not followed.