KANHAIYA MISHRA Vs. BINOD KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case is taken up through Video Conferencing.

(2.) The present revision has been filed against the order dtd. 30/5/2020 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-II, Seraikella in Eviction Suit No. 06/2014 whereby the said eviction suit preferred by the opposite party against the petitioner has been allowed.

(3.) Mr. Amar Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the opposite party, at the outset, raises an objection with regard to the maintainability of the present revision before this Court invoking Sec. 14(8) of the Jharkhand Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 2000 [hereinafter referred to as ..the Act, 2000..]. It is submitted that the Eviction Suit No. 06/2014 was filed by the opposite party in the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-II, Seraikella under Sec. 11(1)(d) of the Act, 2000 on the ground of non-payment of rent by the petitioner w.e.f. June, 2013. As per Sec. 14(1) of the Act, 2000, every suit by a landlord for the recovery of possession of any premises on the ground specified in clause (c) or (e) of Sec. 11(1) of the Act, 2000 is to be dealt with in accordance with the procedure specified in this Sec. . Since the said eviction suit was not filed by the opposite party invoking clause (c) or (e) of Sec. 11(1), rather was filed under clause (d) of Sec. 11(1) of the Act, 2000, the same was not tried following the special procedure provided under Sec. 14 of the Act, 2000 and hence the recourse as provided under proviso to Sec. 14(8) of the Act, 2000 for filing the revision before this Court against the order passed by the original Court will not be available.