Poonam Srivastav, J.-The instant revision arises from the Judgment and Decree of eviction dated 16.11.2009, passed by the Sub-Judge 1st, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 45 of 1999 [Alok Kumar Banerjee vs. Alpana Chaudhary].

2. The Suit was instituted on two grounds-arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 2,400/- and on the ground of personal necessity under section 11(1)(c) of B.B.C.

Act. The plaintiff waived the claim' for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent but contested the suit on the ground of personal necessity. The Court below decreed the suit coming to a conclusion that the disputed premises detailed at Schedule-B of the plaint which is a part and parcel of Schedule-A, was required for the personal use of the plaintiff and landlord.

3. The facts of the case is that the property described in Schedule-A of the plaint, situated in Mohalla J.C. Mallik Road was a joint family property of one Dr. Samarendra Nath Chaudhary and his other co-sharers including the husband of the defendant. There was a partition in the family of Dr. Samarendra Nath Choudhary and other co-sharers of the property described in Schedule-A. Dr. Samarendra Nath Choudhary inherited the property and came in exclusive possession of the same' after the death of his father.

In course of time, property described in Schedule-A was let out to the tenant namely Deb Shankar Dev alias Gonu and also to the defendant by Samarendra Nath Chaudhary. The defendant was inducted as a tenant which is a part of Schedule-A property.

He started running a medical shop and paying Rs. 300/- as monthly rent payable in the succeeding month according to the English calender. The plaintiff entered into an agreement for sale with Dr. Samarendra Nath Chaudhary on 24.5.1993 and constructive possession was also delivered to the plaintiff as he' paid major part of the consideration money.

Subsequent thereto, the defendant started making payment of rent to the plaintiff on an• assurance that he will vacate the Schedule-B property in due course.

Finally, a Sale Deed was executed by Dr.

Samarendra Nath Chaudhary on 28.5.1999 in favour of plaintiff with regard to Schedule-A premises.

The information about the Sale Deed was also given to the defendant by the vendor .himself. The other tenant-Deb Shankar Dev alias Gonu vacated the premises. However, the defendant refused to vacate the premises on request of the plaintiff in the year 1998 a.nd stopped making payment of rent w.e.f. December, 1998.

4. The plaintiff is a practising lawyer at Dhanbad and he has- ancestral house at Jharia Pahari, Katras More, Jharia, District-Dhanbad. This place is situated at a distance of 8 Kms. from Dhanbad Court. The plaintiff 'comes to the Court after travelling a distance of 8 Kms. from Jharia. Besides, he is facing shortage of accommodation since his family is enlarged and the ancestral house is not sufficient to fulfil their requirements. It was in these circumstances, the house was purchased from Dr. Samarendra Nath Chaudhary. It was also averred in the plaint that the ancestral house at Jharia is old and considerably damaged besides due to mining operations of M/s. B.C.C.L, a number of cracks" appeared on the building at the relevant time when the suit was instituted. The ground of ailment of plaintiff's mother due to heart and asthama, was also raised but during the continuation of the proceedings, she died.

The plaintiff further asserted that the premises vacated by Deb Shankar Dev alias Gonu consisted of only two small rooms which was insufficient for the plaintiff to establish his Chamber and also shortage of residential requirement for his family, therefore his need was genuine for the disputed premises which was in occupation of the defendant.

5. The defendant filed his written statement and denied the title of the plaintiff and also applicability of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act. The defendant further claimed that the property was a joint ancestral property of the husba