JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. DEOKI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the tenant -defend ant has been preferred against the judgment and decree of reversal passed by the Additional District Judge -I, Chaibasa in the Eviction Appeal No. 4 of 2000.

(2.) THE plaintiff -respondent filed the suit in the Court of Munsif, Chaibasa for eviction of the defendant from the suit premises on the ground of personal necessity and default in payment of rent. The defendant appellant appeared and contested the suit contending, inter alia, that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties and that he has not defaulted in payment of rent. The defendant also denied the plaintiffs claim of personal necessity.

(3.) ON the basis of the pleadings of the parties, learned trial Court framed several issues after considering the materials and evidences on record, decided issue No. 3 regarding relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties in favour of the plaintiff and held that there was relationship of landlord and tenant between them. However, observing that there was no documentary evidence that transfer of the suit premises made in the month of June 1995 in favour of the plaintiff, was made known to the defendant, learned trial Court held that the fact of transfer came to the knowledge of the defendant in September 1995 and as such, defendant had no liability to pay rent of the preceding months to the plaintiff in absence of any such information. Learned Court thus held that there was no default on the part of the defendant in payment of rent and decided the said issue against the plaintiff. Learned trial Court also held that plaintiff failed to prove her personal necessity of the suit premises and that partial eviction of the suit house will not cater to the need of the plaintiff. With the said findings, learned trial Court decreed the suit in part in favour of the plaintiff, regarding the arrears of rent, but refused to grant decree for eviction.