Landlords must prove bona fide personal necessity for eviction, and once established, the burden shifts to tenants to prove partial eviction sufficiency.

ORDER

9 19-12-2025

This Civil Revision application no: 166 of 2024 has been filed under Section 14 (8) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as “BBC Act”) against the judgment and decree dated 17.10.2024 passed by learned Shri Upender Shah, civil Judge (Sr. Division VIII), Patna in Eviction Suit No. 66 of 2022 whereby and whereunder the Learned trial Court allowed the eviction suit filed by the Plaintiffs/respondents directing the defendants/petitioner to vacate the suit premise mentioned in Schedule-I of the plaint within sixty days from the date of order, failing which the respondents shall be at liberty to obtain eviction of the petitioner through the process of the Court and the costs incurred over the same shall be recoverable from the defendant.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondents are the owner and the landlord of the premises, having a building situated at ground floor of premises area in approx about 1500 sq.ft. bearing holding no. 7/12 (old), present holding no. 12E/G-5, circle no. 243 of Patna Municipal Corporation at mohalla- Telegraph Colony, near Income Tax Golamber at Atul Guljar Apartment detailed & described in schedule 1 of the plaint. Petitioner is the tenant/lessee in respect of said Schedule-I premises for the fixed period of six years w.e.f. 04.08.2017, on certain terms & conditions as incorporated in the lease deed dated 04.08.2017, duly executed in favour of the petitioner by the respondents. The said premises had been taken on for storage of TVS motorcycle as godown and for small scale workshop of TVS motorcycle business and not to sub-let to anybody or other work. Further, the case of the respondents is that as per clause-1 of lease deed the rent of lease hold premises payable by petitioner to the respondents every month regularly by 05 day of each succeeding month which is Rs. 26,000/-. Further condition is that the amount of rent payable by petitioner is liable to be enhanced by 5% per year from the date of the commencement of tenancy. The Petitioner is required to observe all the terms and conditions of the lease for continuation of lease and those terms include regular payment of rent as well.

4. Despite the said terms of tenancy, the petitioner stopped payment of rent since April 2020, as such on account of violation and non-observance of the term no. 1 of deed lease stands terminated and does not continue. On account of default in payment of rent for a period of more than two months i.e., for the month of April 2020 to till date the petitioner has become defaulter in payment of rent and in view of provisions of Section 11 (1) (d) of the B.B.C. Act, 1982 became liable to be evicted from lease hold premises but respondent is not seeking this ground for eviction of petitioner on the ground of default. Respondents have also asserted that they are in dire need of the residential premises for their own residence/occupation, because lessor Arun Kumar Pandey has no other residential house of his own to live in Patna.

5. As respondent no.2 Arun Kumar Pandey is practicing lawyer in Patna High Court. At present, respondent Arun Kumar Pandey is living in rented house at "Kunti Kunj" Budh Nagar, Road No.3, South Chandmari Road, Kankar Bagh, Patna, and the landlord of Kunti Kunj has directed the respondent Arun Kumar Pandey to vacate Kunti Kunj house within three months, therefore, respondent needs suit house described in Schedule-I for their own residence & occupation. It is also case of the respondents that th