BIJAI PRASAD SARAF Vs. SHIV NARAIN PRASAD
LAWS(PAT)-1979-2-7
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Decided on February 20,1979

BIJAI PRASAD SARAF Appellant
VERSUS
SHIV NARAIN PRASAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Lalit Mohan Sharma, J. - (1.)-This civil revision application has been filed by plaintiff no. 2 in a pending suit for eviction of the defendants opposite-party nos. 1 and 2 from certain premises who are in possession of the same as tenants.
(2.)The plaintiff no. 1 the mother of plaintiff no. 2 has been made opposite party no. 3. According to the petitioner's case an order under section 11-A of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') had been passed on the 12th July, 1976 directing the defendants to deposit, in court, arrears of rent and future rent. Admittedly the defendants have made the deposits in time, but according to the case of the petitioner the deposits are not regular inasmuch as the entire rent except for a period of nine days should have been deposited in the name of the petitioner (plaintiff no. 2), which has not been done. There has been a settlement amongst the family members of the plaintiffs including the brother of the petitioners who are not parties of the suit, where the premises in occupation of the defendants have been exclusively allotted to the share of the petitioner. It is said that due to this arrangement, which is known to the defendants, they should have deposited the rent for nine days to the credit of plaintiff no. 1 (opposite party no. 3) and the balance in the name of the petitioner (plaintiff no. 2) and as this has not been done, the defendants have defaulted in making proper deposits incurring the liability of their written statement being struck off. The court below has overruled the objection raised by the petitioner mentioned above, and the petitioner has challenged the order in the present application under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(3.)Mr. Shashi Kumar Sinha appearing for the petitioner has contended that it must be held that the defendants had full knowledge of the agreement amongst the members of the plaintiff's family, and consequently, it must be held that they have defaulted in making the deposits of arrears of rent as required by Section 11-A of the Act.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.