SRI KRISHNA KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. DROUPADI DEVI MODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the Defendant/Petitioner against the order dated 16.6.2010 passed by learned Munsif, Hazaribagh in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 10 of 2006 rejecting the Petitioner?s application dated 11.6.2010 praying for leave to contest the suit.

(2.) Shri P.K. Prasad, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that the Plaintiff/Respondent is required to prove that there was a fixed term tenancy under the registered lease and even after expiry of the period, the Petitioner has not vacated the premises and is continuing in possession. He further submitted that the stand of the Petitioner was/is that he has already vacated the premises in the year 2002 and therefore, this became a triable issue, on which leave should have been granted. He emphasized on the word 'shall' occurring in Section 14(5) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). He relied on the judgment of Precision Steel and Engineering Works and Anr. v. Prem Deva Niranjan Deva Tayal, 1982 3 SCC 270; Nasiruddin Ansari v. Lalan Prasad,1992 1 PLJR(SC) 123; Md. Fahimuddin v. Godhan Prasad Singh and Anr.,1989 PLJR(SC) 899.

(3.) On the other hand, Shri Amar Kumar Sinha, learned Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff/Respondent supported the impugned order and submitted that no triable issues were disclosed by the Petitioner and therefore, leave has been rightly refused by the trial court. He relied on the judgment in the case of Gurprit Singh v. Bhagwan Mishra and Anr. reported in,1997 2 PLJR(SC) 573.