MD. MUKHTAR AHMAD Vs. MANJUR AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. J.P. Jha, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Being aggrieved with the judgment dated 04.09.2015 and decree dated 19.09.2015 passed in Eviction Appeal No 12 of 2011 by the learned District Judge-V, East Singhbhum Jamshedpur, whereby Eviction Appeal No. 12 of 2011 filed by this appellant has been dismissed and affirmed the judgment dated 31.03.2011 and decree dated 04.04.2011 passed in Eviction Suit No. 17 of 2006 the appellant has preferred this appeal.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff before the trial Court in Eviction Suit No. 17 of 2006 is that the schedule of the property was originally allotted to late Zamiruddin, S/o late Abdul Gaffoor by Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO Ltd.). The said late Zamiruddin let out the suit premises to late Jahiruddin, father of the defendant on a monthly rent of Rs. 400/- apart from electricity charges. After the death of the Jahiruddin in the year 1995, the rent of the suit premises was being paid by his son Mukhtar Ahmad to the husband of the plaintiff No. 1(now deceased) on the death of his father at the rate of Rs. 400/-. It was further case of the plaintiff that the said Mukhtar Ahmad stopped the payment of rent to the plaintiff's father in the month of July, 2002, when the plaintiff's father requested for enhancement of rent of Rs. 500/- per month. It was further pleaded that rent of the suit premises was paid till June, 2002. The plaintiff's father requested the defendant Mukhtar Ahmad for enhancement of rent from Rs. 400/- per month to Rs. 500/- per month. It was further case of the plaintiff's that the defendant fabricated the document for agreement for sale in order to grab the property and stopped paying rent to Zamiruddin. The said Zamiruddin died in the month of October, 2004 at Jamshedpur. The plaintiffs have further pleaded that the son of Shamsher Ali @ Laddan S/o Manzoor Ahmed (plaintiff No. 2) was unemployed and said Shamsher Ali @ Laddan wants to start stationary business in the suit premises, therefore, plaintiffs requested the defendant to vacate the suit premises, but the defendant lastly refused to vacate the suit premises in the month of December, 2005, on this ground the Eviction Suit was filed by the plaintiff.