SURESH SHARMA AND ORS. Vs. MD. BASIRUDDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants -appellants have preferred present appeal against the judgment dated 21st April, 2014 and decree dated 03.05.2014 passed and signed by learned District Judge -VII, Dhanbad in connection with Title Appeal No. 61 of 2012 by which the lower appellate court has affirmed the judgment dated 06.06.2012 and decree dated 22.06.2012 passed and signed by the Civil Judge -I, Jr. Division, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 31 of 2006. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that the suit premises as described in Schedule -A of the plaint is a big shed made of brick walls and tin roof having an area of 700 sq. ft. approximately, being a part of municipal holding No. 109 new (old 130) ward No. 15 (new 17) situated at Mithu Road, P.S. Barkatta More, town and District -Dhanbad was given on monthly rent to the defendant. At the time of filing of the suit, the rent for the suit premises was Rs. 500/ - per month besides electricity charges payable in the first week of each succeeding month according to English Calendar. Originally the tenancy was given to late Ram Awatar Sharma and after his death his sons (defendants) succeeded to the said tenancy and are occupying the suit premises as a tenant. They have been paying monthly rent at the rate of Rs. 500/ - per month which was paid till June, 2002 but thereafter defaulted in making payment of rent since 8th July, 2002 for more than two months. The plaintiffs have brought the suit for the willful default in payment of rent and also on the ground of personal necessity as his son Md. Shamim who is unemployed and requires the suit premises for starting a business of fabrication with the help of plaintiff. It is further pleaded that the defendants have damaged the suit premises and instead of vacating the premises, laid false claim hence the suit was brought by the plaintiff.

(2.) The case of defendants, in brief, is that the suit property is not a building as defined in Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'BBC Act') rather it was a Parti land which was given on monthly rent of Rs. 18/ - to Ram Awatar Sharma (father of the defendants). After the death of Ram Awatar Sharma, the defendants inherited the tenancy and continued to pay the rent. As a matter of fact, a shed was constructed by late Ram Awatar Sharma from his own money and therefore the plaintiff is not the owner of said shed. The defendants have inherited the property left by their father. It is denied that the defendants are, or their father was, tenant of the suit premises under the plaintiff on monthly rent of Rs. 500/ - per month payable in the first week of succeeding month according to English Calender. It is specifically averred that the defendants have been regularly remitting the rent for the Parti land in question and it was paid up to June, 2002. They have not been given printed rent receipts on the ground of unavailability with an assurance from the plaintiff that same would be given to them on being available. It is incorrect to say that the defendants have failed to pay agreed rent to the plaintiff since July, 2002 onwards and they have not paid any rent despite the repeated request and demand made thereof. It is contended that the defendants are not defaulter in making the payment of rent. Now the suit premises is required by the plaintiff for his personal use.

(3.) The learned trial Court framed following issues: