PAWAN KUMAR Vs. RAMESHWAR PRASAD SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appeals arise out of common judgment and decree, similar questions of law are involved in these appeals, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.

(2.) BOTH these appeals have been filed against the judgment and decree dated 12.7.1994, passed by 3rd Addl. District Judge, Patna in Title Appeal No. 3/94 and Title Appeal No. 4/94 reversing the judgment and decree dated 13.12.1993 passed by Munsif 3rd, Patna in Eviction Suit No. 1/92 and Eviction Suit No. 2/92 respectively. In both the suits the plaintiffs was Rameshwar Prasad Singh and he filed eviction suit on the ground of default in payment of rent. In Title Suit No. 1/92 the defendant was Pawan Kumar and in Title Suit No. 2/92 the defendant was Ram Bali Thakur.

(3.) THE plaintiff filed Eviction Suit No. 84/84 against Pawan Kumar and Eviction Suit No. 86/84 against Ram Bali Thakur on the ground of personal necessity. The plaintiff also filed Eviction suit against other tenants on the same ground of personal necessity. During pendency of the suit the rent of the suit premises was determined by the House Controller. The eviction suits filed by the plaintiff were decreed vide judgment and decree dated 28.2.1989. The defendants preferred Civil Revision Nos. 744/89 and 748/89 which were dismissed on 23.3.1990. The defendants and other tenants challenged the judgment and decree before the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 421, 422 and 423 of 1991. All the Civil Appeals were disposed of by common order on 29.1.1991 with the consent of the parties. The Apex Court while disposing of Civil Appeals directed the tenants to deposit the arrears of rent up to date before the Rent Controller within six months as determined by the House Controller failing which the landlord will get the right to execute the decree for eviction as against the defaulting tenants and they shall continue to pay the current rent so long as they continue in old premises.