BIMAL RAJAK Vs. PARMILA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment dtd. 17/2/2017 and decree dtd. 21/2/2017 passed in Eviction Title Appeal No.6 of 2014 by the learned District Judge-II, Ramgarh affirming the judgment dtd. 13/5/2014 (decree dtd. 21/5/2014) passed in Eviction Suit No.14 of 2008 by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hazaribagh. The suit seeking eviction of the defendant was decreed and the learned 1st appellate court has affirmed the judgment. Consequently, the defendant (the alleged tenant), is under appeal before this Court.

(2.) This appeal was admitted for final hearing vide order dtd. 29/7/2021 by referring to the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2002) 1 SCC 90 (Rajendra Tiwary Vs. Basudeo Prasad and Another), and the following substantial questions of law were framed for consideration:

(3.) The learned Senior counsel for the appellant, while assailing the judgments passed by both the learned courts, has submitted that the core issue involved in this case is as to whether there was landlord- tenant relationship in view of the Kirayanama which was exhibited as Exhibit-1. He submits that the alleged Kirayanama is dtd. 19/9/1984, which is unilaterally executed by the father of the defendant (whose signature was disputed) stating that he would pay Rs.60.00 per month as rent. He submits that the Kirayanama neither contains the details of the property which is given in tenancy nor it was signed by the plaintiffs nor any period of tenancy has been mentioned therein, nor the Kirayanama has been duly registered.