Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Santosh Kumar Nagelia, son of Late Surendra Kumar Nagelia – Appellant
Versus
Meera Rani Dutta, wife of Late Upendra Mohan Dutta – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the opposite parties.
2. The present civil revision is directed against the judgment dated 16.02.2018 (decree signed on 24.02.2018) passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-VI, Jamshedpur in Original Suit No. 76 of 1993, whereby and whereunder the suit of the plaintiffs /Opposite Parties has been decreed and defendants / petitioners have been directed to hand over vacant possession of the shop premises to the opposite parties within a period of two months from the date of judgment, failing which the plaintiffs / opposite parties are at liberty to evict the defendants / petitioners through process of the Court.
3. The factual matrix giving rise to this revision is that the plaintiffs / opposite parties have instituted a suit for eviction under Section 11 (i)(C) read with Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act in the court of learned Munsif at Jamshedpur, being Eviction Suit No. 76 of 1993, praying therein for the following reliefs:-
(i) A decree for recovery of possession of the suit premises described in the Schedule to the plaint evicting the defendants therefr
The legal principle that every co-owner can maintain a suit for eviction without joining other co-owners if they do not object.
The court concluded that a landlord does not need formal attornment to establish a tenant's obligation after property transfer, emphasizing the need must be bona fide.
Transferee landlord can evict for personal necessity without attornment; unproven tenant-prior agreement to sell does not end tenancy; revisional court examines only legality, not reappreciates facts....
The judgment emphasizes the importance of establishing the landlord-tenant relationship and complying with statutory provisions regarding rent payment and termination of tenancy.
The court affirmed that a landlord must prove bona fide personal necessity for eviction, and failure to assert partial eviction undermines the tenant's defense.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
