BANKEY LAL GUPTA Vs. SANJAY KUMAR AGRAWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This instant appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and decree dated 21.01.2015 and 27.01.2015 respectively passed by the Principal District Judge Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Appeal No. 78 of 2013 affirming the judgment and decree passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 1, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 44 of 2007 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff and directing the appellant for vacating the suit premises.

(2.) The appellant was defendant and the respondent was the plaintiff in the trial court hence, they shall be referred to as the plaintiff and defendant for sake of the convenience in the present appeal.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff is that schedule 'B' property is integral part of schedule 'A' property of which the recorded owner was Bela Ghatak. That defendant was a tenant in the schedule 'B' premises on a monthly rent of Rs. 150/-. The plaintiff intimated the defendant about the purchase of the property and informed him that the future rent should be remitted to him, however, the defendant failed to remit the rent from March 1988 to November 1994 and consequent thereto, the plaintiff sent notice intimating the defendant that he had defaulted in payment of rent and asked him to vacate the suit premises. The plaintiff has also pleaded that he required schedule 'B' premises for his personal necessity. That since the defendant did not pay any heed to the request of the plaintiff, Title Eviction Suit no.14 of 1995 was instituted. During the pendency of the said suit, an application under Section 15 of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter to be referred as 'B.B.C. Act' for short) was filed for depositing the arrears whereupon the Court directed the defendant to deposit the rent from November 1992 to July 1999 subject to the condition that the plaintiff shall not withdraw the said amount till disposal of the suit. It is stated that due to non-prosecution of the suit, the same was dismissed, where-after, a miscellaneous case was filed which also stood dismissed. After the dismissal of the Title Eviction Suit no.14 of 1995, the defendant failed to deposit the rent, and thereby, he again defaulted in payment of rent. That the cause of action for the suit arose on 01.07.1988 and subsequent thereto, when the plaintiff failed to deposit the monthly rent and also after April 2004, i.e. after the dismissal of the earlier suit.