SHANKAR PRASAD Vs. RABINDRA NATH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is the tenants -defendants second appeal against the judgment and decree of affirmance passed in Title Appeal No. 38 of 1984 dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court in Title Eviction Suit No. 47 of 1987/27 of 1992.

(2.) THE plaintiffs filed the suit for eviction against the defendants on the ground of default in payment of rent, personal necessity and breach of terms of tenancy. The plaintiffs claimed themselves as the landlord on the basis of their acquisition of the suit property by virtue of a registered sale deed. The plaintiffs requested the defendants to vacate the suit premises as they require the same also for their own use and occupation as for that need they had acquired the suit premises. The plaintiffs had also to dig a well and repair the compound walls. According to the plaintiffs the defendants had stopped payment of rent since March, 1983 and on that ground also rendered themselves liable for eviction from the suit premises. They also materially damaged the suit premises and breached the terms of tenancy.

(3.) THE trial Court on the basis of the pleadings, framed several issues. After thorough appraisal and discussion of the facts materials and evidences on record, held that there is relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff and the defendants. The trial Court also decided other issues in favour of the plaintiffs and also considered the desirability of the partial eviction of suit premises and after discussion came to the finding that the plaintiffs need will not be satisfied by partial eviction and that they require the entire suit premises for their residential and business purpose. The trial Court, thus, decreed the suit and directed the defendants to vacate the suit premises and hand over khas possession to the plaintiffs. The defendants then filed an appeal before the District Judge, Deoghar, which was registered as Title Appeal No. 38 of 1994. The said appeal was finally heard and decided by the First Additional District Judge, Deoghar by the impugned judgment and decree. The Lower Appellate Court has also thoroughly considered and discussed the grounds taken by the appellants, the facts, evidences and materials on record and the provision of law and came to the finding that the plaintiffs have established that there is relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and that the defendants defaulted in payment of rent and that the plaintiffs required the suit premises for their personal use. The Lower Appellate Court, thus, upheld the findings arrived to by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal.