The existence of a landlord-tenant relationship is essential for eviction under the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011, and powers of attorney holders can file eviction suits on behalf of landlords.

ORDER :

Rajesh Shankar, J.

1. The present batch of writ petitions have been preferred for quashing the common order dated 06.12.2022 passed in J.B.C.R. No.22 of 2020, J.B.C.R. No.14 of 2020, J.B.C.R. No.17 of 2020, J.B.C.R. No.23 of 2020, J.B.C.R. No.12 of 2020, J.B.C.R. No.25 of 2020, and J.B.C.R. No.19 of 2020, whereby the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh-respondent no.2 has set aside the orders dated 14.10.2019 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ramgarhrespondent no.3 in Eviction Appeal No.26 of 2019, Eviction Appeal No.28 of 2019, Eviction Appeal No.24 of 2019, Eviction Appeal No.18 of 2019, Eviction Appeal No.25 of 2019, Eviction Appeal No.29 of 2019 & Eviction Appeal No.16 of 2019 and has restored the orders dated 11.02.2019 passed in Eviction Suit No.20 of 2018 & Eviction Suit No.19 of 2018; orders dated 19.01.2019 passed in Eviction Suit No.07 of 2018 & Eviction Suit No.17 of 2018; orders dated 09.02.2019 passed in Eviction Suit No.15 of 2018 & Eviction Suit No.41 of 2018; and the order dated 19.01.2019 passed in Eviction Suit No.10 of 2018 by the House Rent Controller-cum-S.D.O., Ramgarh-respondent no.4. Further prayer has been made for quashing and setting aside the said orders passed in Eviction Suit No.20 of 2018, Eviction Suit No.19 of 2018, Eviction Suit No.07 of 2018, Eviction Suit No.17 of 2018, Eviction Suit No.15 of 2018, Eviction Suit No.41 of 2018 & Eviction Suit No.10 of 2018 by the respondent no.4, whereby the petitioners were directed to pay arrears of rent to the respondent no.5 (respondent-Sairun Nisha in JBCR No.25 of 2020) and to vacate the respective shops which were in their possession.

2. The factum of the case, as stated in the writ petitions, is that the petitioners have constructed their respective shops over the land situated at Mouza Ramgarh Cantt., P.S. Ramgarh, P.S. No. 82 under Khata No. 26, plot no. 748, total area 1.44 acres (hereinafter referred as the said land) and are in possession of the said shops for the last 25-30 years. Guduwa Sheikh was the Khatiyani raiyat of the said land who died in the year 1926 living behind one son namely Sahdul Mian and three daughters, namely, Fatima Khatoon, Rahiman Khatoon and Bhuini Khatoon. Guduwa Sheikh had orally partitioned his entire land including the said land among his legal heirs in the year 1921 i.e. prior to his death and the said land was in exclusive possession of his son, namely, Sahdul Mian. Subsequently, Sahdul Mian died living behind two legal heirs, namely, Ashraf Miyan and Taj Mohammad.

3. One Ayub Khan-respondent no.5 filed eviction suits before the respondent no. 4 for eviction of the petitioners (except the petitioner Lala Khan) from their respective shops on the ground of default in making payment of rent, personal necessity etc. claiming that legal heirs of the recorded tenant had executed powers of attorney dated 29.08.2013, 04.09.2013 and 19.07.2018 in his favour. Sairun Nisha filed Eviction Suit no.41 of 2018 against the petitioner Lala Khan. The petitioners appeared in the said suits and filed their respective reply to the show cause notices denying tenant-landlord relationship between them and the respondent no.5/ legal heirs of the recorded tenant. The respondent no.4 allowed the eviction suits in favour of the respondent no.5 as well as Sairun Nisha holding that there was oral tenancy between the petitioners and the legal heirs of the recorded tenant. It was further held that the respondent no.5 was the powers of attorney holder of the said legal heirs and hence, the petitioners were liable to pay monthly rent to him. The petitioners were defaulters in making payment of rent since January 2014. It was also held that the respondent no.5 as well as Sairun Nisha had bonafide personal necessity of the premises in question for which the petitioners were held liable to be evicted under section 19(i)(b)(c)(d) of the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011 (in short ‘the Act, 2011’). The re