AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 350 wordsGurusharan Sharma, J.—Heard the parties plaintiff-opposite party filed Title (Eviction) Suit No. 2 of 2001, u/s 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 for defendant''s eviction from the suit holding No. 922 situated in Godda town. Defendant besides challenging the maintainability of the suit at the instance of the plaintiff and for rejection of the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, filed a petition (Annexure-3) purporting to be u/s 14(4) of the Act on 28.8.2001 with a prayer to grant leave to contest the suit and also raised question of maintainability thereof. A perusal of the said petition, Annexure-3 reveals that absolutely no ground, as required u/s 14(4) of the Act to contest the suit was mentioned therein. Therefore, in fact it was not a petition for grant of leave to contest, u/s 14(4) of the Act. In such circumstance, the Trial Court was authorized to pass eviction order and decree on the basis of averments made in the plaint, treating them to have been admitted by the defendant. It appears that on the plaintiffs petition, Annexure-2, filed on 14.8.2001 for passing an eviction order u/s 14(4) of the Act, the Trial Court passed the impugned order dated 24.2.2003, directing the defendant to vacate the suit premises and hand over vacant possession thereof to the plaintiff.
It is well settled that while passing the order for eviction at the stage of Section 14(4) of the Act, the Trial Court is required to consider the averments made in the plaint seeking eviction under the provisions of Section 11 and on being satisfied, prima facie, that such eviction order was required to be passed and pass orders accordingly in accordance with law. I find that the impugned order has been passed without following the mandatory requirements for passing eviction order u/s 14(4) of the Act.
I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the Trial Court to pass a fresh order, in accordance with law. This Revision application is disposed of with the above observations/directions.
