- (1.) The present writ petition has been preferred against an order passed by the learned Additional MunsifII, Ranchi dated 30th October, 2009 in Eviction Suit No. 24 of 2003 whereby, an application, preferred by the present petitioner (original plaintiff) under Section 15 of Bihar Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 1982, in short) has been dismissed.
(2.) Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case: (i) It appears that the present petitioner, who is original plaintiff, has instituted Eviction Suit No. 24 of 2003 for evicting the original defendants from the premises, on the ground of expiry of the lease. The lease, as alleged by the original plaintiff, has expired on 30th March, 2003. (ii) It appears that the rent, as contented by the learned counsel for the original plaintiff, was fixed at the rate of 2640.00 per month, which the original defendants did not pay from the month of December, 2006 to April, 2007 and therefore, an application was preferred, under Section 15 of the Act, 1982. (iii) It also appears, looking to the provisions of Section 15 of the Act, 1982, which is directory and not mandatory, that there is some delay in making payment of the rent, as stated in the memo of the petition. It appears that on earlier occasion, an order dated 30th (iv)April, 2007 was passed to the effect that the original defendants will make payment of the rent from 1st July, 2003 to November, 2006 and looking to the present application, under Section 15 of the Act, 1982, it is alleged by the original plaintiff that the rent is not yet paid from December, 2006 to April, 2007. It appears that though the respondents have deposited the amount, every time there is delay. But, it is assured by the learned counsel for the respondentoriginal defendants that the rent for the month of December, 2006 to April, 2007 will be deposited on or before 14th May, 2010, before the trial court and he has also assured that henceforth, there will not be any delay in depositing the amount of the rent, before the trial court. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the respondentoriginal defendants that they are staying at the suit premises since last twenty years and therefore, let a direction be given to the trial court to dispose of Eviction Suit No. 24 of 2003, within the stipulated time. Plaintiff has examined all his witnesses. Even original defendants have already examined two of the witnesses and now only two more witnesses are yet to been examined by the original defendants' side, which will be over, as early as possible.
(3.) In view of the aforesaid submissions, I hereby, direct the respondents (original defendants) to deposit rent towards the month of December, 2006 to April, 2007 on or before 14th May, 2010 and henceforth, the rent of every month will be deposited, as per the direction, given by the trial court, vide order dated 30th April, 2007.;