- (1.) BY Court -Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) PERUSED the papers. The present petition is filed under Section 14 (8) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 against the judgment dated 17.03.2007, passed by the learned Munsif, 1st, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 67 of 2003, whereby the learned Munsif, Ist was pleased to decree the suit for eviction under Section 11 (1) (c) read with Section 14 of the Bihar Building (Least Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 and further directed the defendant to vacate the tenanted premises within 60 days from the date of the decree.
(3.) BRIEF facts of this case is that Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) is the owner of Municipality Holding No. -77 and the Petitioner (Original defendant) is the monthly tenant under him on a monthly rent of Rs.150/ - in respect of portion of the said Holding. A Title (Eviction) Suit No. 67 of 2003 filed by the Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) on the ground that the Petitioner (Original defendant) paid to her the monthly rent last till June 2002 but did not pay the rent, thereafter and also on the ground that she required the house for her personal necessity as the Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) and their family members are residing in a rented house and there are 15 members in her family. The Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) also averred that the Petitioner (Original defendant) had agreed to vacate the premises within two month but he had refused to vacate on 08.09.2002. In the Title (Eviction) Suit Plaintiff (Original defendant) appeared and filed Written Statement and denied the averment of the Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) on the ground that he is the owner of the suit premises and is residing therein since more than 42 years and opposite party/Original Plaintiff has no right title and interest in respect of the said premises and he seriously disputed the title of the Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff). In support of her case, Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) examined witnesses as P.W. No. -1 Md. Aslam, P.W. No. - 2 Rajendra Prasad Sao, P.W. No. - 3 Amar Kumar Sao, P.W. No. - 4 is the Opposite Party (Original Plaintiff) herself and P.W. No. - 5 Diso Kumhar who has proved the certain documents as Sale Deed No. - 9928 Ext. -1, rent receipt Ext. -2 and tax receipt issued by municipality Ext. 3. Plaintiff (Original Defendant) has also examined his witnesses to establish his case in course of hearing of the suit and the D.W. No. - 1 is the Petitioner (Original Defendant) himself, D.W. No.2 Sahdeo Saw, D.W. No.3 is Laxmi Narayan Sinha and has proved the document of his title Hukum -nama is Ext. - 'A', rent receipt is 'B', receipt of Electricity Bill Ext. -'C' and notice issued to him in respect of BPLE case Ext. 'D'. ;