BAIJNATH PRASAD Vs. SAHDEO MAHTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Civil Revision has been filed by the sole defendant -petitioner under the proviso to sub -section (8) of Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act' for the sake of brevity) challenging order/judgment of his eviction dated 25.3.2003, by which the learned Munsif, Biharsharif, Nalanda, decreed Eviction Suit No. 11 of 1998. It transpires that against the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 25.3.2003, the defendant -petitioner preferred an appeal bearing T.A. No. 2 of 2003, which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge -I, Nalanda, on 12.9.2006 holding that title appeal was not maintainable and a civil revision would lie under the proviso to Section 14(8) of the Act as the eviction suit was filed only on the ground of personal necessity and the issue regarding default was wrongly framed by the trial court.

(2.) THE aforesaid suit was filed by the sole plaintiff -opposite party for eviction of defendant -petitioner from the suit premises, namely, Shop No. 5 situated in a portion of plaintiff's building standing on Plot No. 52, appertaining to Khata No. 240 of Thana No. 97 within Tauzi No. 11092 by the side of the road in Muhalla Murarpur (Laheri) of the town of Biharsharif (Nalanda) on the ground of personal necessity of the plaintiff for the said shop room.

(3.) HOWEVER , the ground, on which the plaintiff sought eviction of the defendant was only his bona fide requirement of the suit premises as he had three married daughters, out of whom one was Sanju Devi, whose husband Bachchu Mahto was earlier a cultivator, but subsequently due to heart ailment was unable to continue with cultivation and, thus, required the suit premises for running a shop to earn livelihood for his family.