KHURSID ALAM Vs. JAHIDA KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 28.02.2015 and decree dated 04.03.2015 passed and signed by learned District Judge -II, Dhanbad in connection with Title Appeal No. 100 of 2013 whereby the judgment dated 19.09.2013 and decree dated 24.09.2013 passed and signed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division 1, Dhanbad in connection with Title (Eviction) Suit No. 38 of 2010 have been upheld. Appellant was the defendant whereas respondent was the plaintiff in the trial court.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that defendant was inducted as tenant in the suit premises. It is disclosed in the plaint that the previous landlady Smt. Pushpa Agrawal transferred the suit property by executing registered deed of sale No. 1296 dated 01.05.2009 in favour of the plaintiff and the symbolic possession thereof was also transferred. The previous landlady Smt. Pushpa Agrawal informed the defendant about sale and transfer of the suit property in favour of the plaintiff and urged the defendant to pay the rent to the purchaser (plaintiff) from the month of September, 2009 at the rate of Rs. 300/ - per month which was then prevailing. It is alleged that the defendant did not pay heed to the request made by previous landlady Smt. Pushpa Agrawal and he stopped making payment of rent. The plaintiff, vide letter dated 19.01.2010 also requested the defendant to pay the arrears of rent with effect from September, 2009 at the rate of Rs. 300/ - per month and also to vacate the suit premises within a month after receipt of the letter in view of the fact that plaintiff require the suit premises reasonably and in good faith for her use and occupation. The defendant with mala fide intention has replied to the plaintiff claiming that he had been paying rent to Smt. Pushpa Agrawal, the previous landlady. Since the defendant failed to vacate the suit premises, the plaintiff brought a suit on the ground contained under Section 11(i)(c) and 11(i)(d) of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2000 (for short hereinafter referred to as the "JBC Act").

(3.) ON the basis of pleadings issues have been framed. The parties to the suit examined their witnesses and produced documents in support of their respective claim and contention and the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, after considering the material available on record, decreed the suit on both the counts in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant then preferred Title Appeal No. 100 of 2013 before the learned District Judge, Dhanbad which stood disposed of from the Court of the District Judge -II, Dhanbad and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court have been affirmed.