====================================================== Shatrughan Sah, S/o late Chulhai Sah, resident of Balbhadra Bhawan-2nd Floor, Southern side v. 1
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Revision No.24 of 2011 ====================================================== Shatrughan Sah, S/o late Chulhai Sah, resident of Balbhadra Bhawan-2nd Floor, Southern side North Branch Lane of Parwati Path, New Chitragupta Nagar, P.S. Patrakar Nagar, District-Patna Versus 1. Smt. Shanti Devi @ Smt. Shanti Kumari Saha, W/o Prof. Ram Padarath .... .... Petitioner/s Saha 2. Prof. Ram Padarath Saha, S/o Late Ram Khelawan Saha Both resident of Shanti Vihar Apartmnet, Flat No. 101, North Branch Lane of Parwati Path, New Chitragupta Nagar, P.S. Patrakar Nagar, District-Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 07. 08-02-2013 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Legal Reasoning
Singh, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff-opposite party nos. 1 and 2. This Civil Revision application under Section 14(8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.11.2010 passed by learned Munsif- III, Patna in Eviction Suit No. 22 of 2008, whereby the learned Magistrate while decreeing the suit has directed the defendant- petitioner to vacate the suit premises which is a flat situated on the second floor of the southern side of a four storied building which is known as Balbhadra Bhawan situated at Parwati Path, Patna High Court C.R. No.24 of 2011 (7) dt.08-02-2013 2 New Chitragupta Nagar, P.S. Patrakar Nagar in the town and district of Patna. The Plaintiffs are the owner of the suit premises as described hereinabove which is stated to be a four storied building containing several flats, halls and single rooms etc. One of the flats situated on the second floor of the said building was taken on rent by the defendant-petitioner in the month of January, 2003 on a payment of rent agreed upon at Rs. 1800/- per month which is stated to have been enhanced with effect from July, 2004 to Rs. 1890/- per month. It is the case of the plaintiff that since after June, 2008 the defendant-petitioner has failed to pay any rent. The plaintiff no. 1 is an Ex-Headmistress of Kendriya Vidyalaya, Bailey Road having retired from service on 30.06.2009. Plaintiff no. 2 is a retired professor of Economics having superannuated from the College of Commerce under the Magadh University. The plaintiffs wishing to open a primary school upto +2 level on the CBSE pattern together with hostel required the tenants to vacate the premises. It is the plaintiffs’ case that since both of them were academician hence they wanted to utilize their experience in the field by opening a school with hostel facility. Some of the tenants appreciating the requirement of the plaintiffs vacated the premises but the defendant flatly refused to vacate Patna High Court C.R. No.24 of 2011 (7) dt.08-02-2013 3 the flat and it is in these circumstances that the suit was filed in the year 2008 giving rise to Eviction Suit No. 22 of 2008. The defendant apart from objecting to the bona fide requirement of the plaintiffs by submitting that it is a false plea taken only to evict the tenants with a view to get higher rent also submits that he had entered the premises on the own request of the plaintiff and is also distantly related to them. The learned trial court framed seven issues of which issue nos. 4 and 5 were relevant for adjudication of the matter. There is no dispute with regard to the landlord tenant relationship between the parties. Issue no. 4 related to the claim of the petitioner for the premises on grounds of personal necessity and issue no. 5 is related to the bona fide requirement of the plaintiff. The learned court below having deliberated upon the oral and documentary evidence led by the contesting parties, by judgment and order dated 30.11.2010 has been pleased to decree the suit in favour of the plaintiffs and hence the present Civil Revision application. Before this Court proceeded to consider the matter on merits, this Court required the plaintiffs to bring on record the developments that have taken place in their endeavour to open a school with hostel facility in the premises. This Court also sought the willingness of the defendant-petitioner to vacate the premises Patna High Court C.R. No.24 of 2011 (7) dt.08-02-2013 4 within a reasonable period in the light of the decree passed by the court below. An affidavit was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs- opposite party on 05.02.2003 enclosing certain correspondence made with the Human Resources Department, Govt. of Bihar with regard to opening of a school upto +2 level on the CBSE pattern. An application as required under the Bihar Municipal Act, 2007 seeking permission of the Municipal authorities for opening such school together with the assessment carried out by the authorities was also enclosed with the affidavit. It is manifest from the said affidavit that the claim of the petitioner seeking eviction of the plaintiffs for opening a primary school up to +2 level with hostel facility is not a mere pretext for seeking eviction of the tenants rather the plaintiffs have gone ahead in that direction.
Legal Reasoning
It was stated at the bar by Mr. Singh, appearing for the plaintiffs that most of the tenants have vacated the premises except the defendant-petitioner and another person, namely, Murari Prasad Sinha who has taken a flat for his son but has agreed to vacate the same by 30.11.2013. It has further been very clearly stated by the plaintiffs in paragraph-4 of the affidavit that if at any stage the plaintiffs failed in their object of running a school together with hostel facility and decided to rent out the building for residential purposes, they would offer one of the flat to the Patna High Court C.R. No.24 of 2011 (7) dt.08-02-2013 5 petitioner. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the defendant- petitioner on 07.02.2013 undertaking to vacate the premises on 30.11.2013 that is the date on which the other tenant Murari Prasad Sinha has also undertaken to vacate the flat occupied by his son. The parties herein in fact are not at issues and each is willing to accept the need of the other. There being practically no differences rather a consensus between the parties, this Court does not feel the necessity to adjudicate on the matter in issue and this application is disposed of recording the undertaking of the petitioner to vacate the premises by 30.11.2013 and until which date further proceedings in Execution Case No. 5 of 2011 pending in the court of Munsif-III, Patna shall remain stayed. If the petitioner fails to vacate the premises by 30.11.2013 in terms of his undertaking, the stay would cease to operate with effect from 01.12.2013 and the Execution Case shall revive and be taken to its logical conclusion. The plaintiffs-opposite party shall also be at liberty to take recourse to such other remedies as may be available to them in law, on the failure of the petitioner in violating his undertaking. The petitioner would be under a legal obligation to make payment of the rent for the period he shall be in occupation of the flat on month to month basis without any Patna High Court C.R. No.24 of 2011 (7) dt.08-02-2013 6 delay and upon failure of the petitioner to do so, also would be a violation of his undertaking before this Court and the plaintiffs shall be at liberty to seek modification of this order. The plaintiffs shall also be bound by their undertaking made in their affidavit filed on 05.02.2013 that in case their endeavour to open the school with hostel facility does not materialize and they decide to put the suit premises on rent for residential purposes, they would offer a flat in the building to the petitioner. In case the plaintiffs violate this undertaking given before this Court, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take recourse to such remedies as may be available to him under law. With the observation and direction aforementioned this
Decision
application is disposed of. S.Sb/- (Jyoti Saran, J)