PADAM SINGH JAIN Vs. CHANDRA BROS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision application is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15-12-1987 passed by Sri Ishwari Prasad, Subordinate Judge, IIIrd Court, Patna in Title Eviction Suit No. 68/9 of 1985/86 whereby and whereunder the said learned Court decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff-opposite party for eviction of the defendant-petitioner.

(2.) The facts of the case, bereft of all unnecessary details are as follows:- The plaintiff-opposite party No. 1 initially instituted the aforementioned Title Eviction Suit No. 68 of 1985 purporting to be in terms of S.14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity called the said Act) for eviction of the petitioner on the ground of its personal necessity being a portion of the ground floor of a building commonly known as 'Chandda Bhawan' situated in New Market, Station Road, being holding No. 64/93, Circle No. 235 Ward No. 10 and also from the entire second floor of the said building measuring about 900 sq. ft., except one room which is said to be in the occupation of the plaintiff. It was alleged in the plaint that the plaintiff No. 1 firm was a group of concerns namely, Chandra Industrial Corporation and Electrical and Machinery, which deal in manufacture, contract and distribution business. The ground floor of the building in question consists of three rooms and one small Verandah out of which two rooms and the Verandah are under the tenancy of another tenant, namely, Shiv Muni and Co. and rest one room on the ground floor is in the occupation of the defendant-petitioner. The first floor of the building is in occupation of the plaintiff wherein it with great difficulty has allegedly been accommodating its head office as also had offices of its sister concerns namely, Chandra Industrial Corporation and Electrical and Machinery. The entire second floor measuring about 900 sq. ft. is in occupation of the defendant petitioner except one small room measuring about 72 sq. ft., wherein the plaintiff stores electrical materials with great difficulty. The second floor of the said building was let out to the defendant-petitioner for a period of eleven months on 1-9-1980. The defendant-petitioner had been paying a monthly rental of Rs. 80/- per month for the tenants premises on the ground floor and Rs. 600/- for the premises on the second floor as referred to above. According to the plaintiff the deed of lease with regard to the second floor expired on 31-8-1981 and despite several requests made by the plaintiff, the defendant did not vacate the tenanted premisses, although the same was bona fide and in good faith required by the plaintiff.

(3.) In application for amendment of the plaint was filed by the plaintiff No. 1 under O.6, R.17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called the Code) and by an order dated 2-4-1987 passed by the learned Court below the said application was allowed and the opposite party Nos. 2 to 5 were added as plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 5 in the aforementioned suit, allegedly on the ground that they were the present partners of the plaintiff No. 1-firm.