GURUSHARAN SHARMA, J. - (1.) DEFENDANT is appellant. Plaintiff's suit for eviction against the defendant from the suit premises detailed in Schedule 'A' to the plaint, under the provisions of Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1977 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act' for short) on the ground of personal necessity and default in payment of rent was decreed on 20.1.1991.
(2.) DEFENDANT preferred appeal which was allowed in part. Trial Court's finding on default in payment of rent was reversed and it was held that defendant was not a defaulter within the meaning of the Act. However, first appellate Court confirmed trial Court's finding that plaintiff has reasonable and bonafide requirement of the suit house for being allotted to its employees. Defendant has, therefore, filed the present Second Appeal. Admittedly, Caiser Bungalows were constructed by appellant for the employees of M/s. Caiser Company a Contracting Firm of United State of America (U.S.A.) and as soon as their contract work in the appellant Company was over, respondent allotted/let out those Bungalows to different persons, including appellant, who was alloted suit bungalow described in Schedule 'A' to the plaint temporarily vide House permit No. 64233 dated 16-12-1988 (Exhibit 7) on monthly rental of Rs. 636.88 payable according to English calender month, besides electrical charges etc.
(3.) RESPONDENT claimed that in order to meet the pressing demand of officers of the Company, who were eligible for such bungalows, but where not being provided with such accommodation, the suit bungalow was required bonafide and in good faith. The appellant had also not paid rent for two months, namely, October and November, 1979, till the date the suit was filed, i.e. 20.12.1979. A claim for recovery of arrears of rent, detailed in Schedule (sic) to the plaint, was also made. Respondent sent notice to the appellant to vacate the suit bungalow by 31-8-1979.;