Disposed

Md. Ibrar Alam @ Laddu v. Md. Shaukat Ali

Patna HC21 Jan 2013C.R./214/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil revision against an eviction decree, the High Court accepted the petitioner’s undertaking to vacate by July 31, 2013. The execution proceedings were stayed conditionally; if the petitioner fails to vacate, the stay is lifted and the executing court may proceed.

What did the court decide?

Execution proceedings stayed until 31.7.2013; stay to be vacated if petitioner fails to vacate the shop, permitting the executing court to proceed.

Md. Ibrar Alam @ Laddu Vs Md. Shaukat Ali — Property and Title | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Revision No.214 of 2011

¶2

====================================================== Md. Ibrar Alam @ Laddu, son of late Abdul Qaiyum, resident of AtBiharsharif, Mohalla- Ambar Uchkaper, P.S.- Biharsharif, DistrictNaldanda. .... Defendant .... Petitioner/s Versus Md. Shaukat Ali, son of late Md. Ahiya, resident of Mohalla- Kharaji Alamganj, near Jama Masjid, P.S.- Laheri Biharsharif, District- Naldanda. ....Plaintiff .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surya Kant Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER 7 21-01-2013 Heard Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Surya Kant Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the sole opposite party.

¶3

This civil revision application is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.8.2011 passed in Eviction Suit No.01 of 2010 by the learned Munsif, Nalanda at Biharsharif, whereby the learned Munsif while decreeing the suit on contest in favour of the plaintiff has issued directions to the defendantpetitioner to hand over the vacant possession of the shop in question within a period of sixty days failing which the same would be vacated through the process of the court.

¶4

The suit property in question is a shop and the learned trial court upon considering the rival contentions of the parties has upheld the plea of personal necessity of the plaintiff

¶5

Patna High Court C.R. No.214 of 2011 (7) dt.21-01-2013

¶6

¶7

for the shop in question in the light of the evidence led by the parties and while also upholding that the requirement of the plaintiff would not be satisfied by partial eviction, the suit had been decreed in favour of the plaintiff and hence the present civil revision application questioning the judgment and order.

¶8

When the matter was earlier taken up for consideration, an offer was made by the learned counsel for the judgment debtor-petitioner to allow him to remain in the shop in question for a reasonable period to enable him to search for an alternative shop as his immediate displacement from the shop would be prejudicial to his business. It is not in contest that the judgment debtor-petitioner is in occupation of the shop in question since the year 1991, i.e. more than twenty years of today. Considering the offer made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner the matter was adjourned and whereafter the same has been taken up today when a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner giving an undertaking to vacate the shop which is the subject-matter of the decree by 31.7.2013 and also to pay the rent for the said period. Paragraphs 4 to 7 of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the judgment debtor-petitioner are reproduced hereinbelow containing his undertaking:

¶9

Patna High Court C.R. No.214 of 2011 (7) dt.21-01-2013

¶10

¶11

“4.That in another area known as Kachari Road shop of Imambara is being constructed and the petitioner has contacted for taking a shop for shifting of his business and the same has been negotiated.

¶12

5. That the said shop is under construction and the owner has stated the petitioner to hand over the shop by July, 2013.

¶13

6. That the petitioner undertakes to vacate the shop in suit by 31^st of July, 2013.

¶14

7. That the petitioner is ready to pay the rent of the shop upto the time is allowed by this Hon’ble Court.”

¶15

The offer made by the judgment debtor-petitioner

¶16

as reduced in the affidavit is also not objected to by the decreeholder-opposite party.

¶17

Considering the fair offer made by the judgment debtor-petitioner and not objected to by the decree holderopposite party this Court without entering into the merits of the rival contentions disposes of this civil revision application in the light of the undertaking given by the judgment debtor-petitioner of vacating the shop which is the subject-matter of the judgment and order passed by the learned trial court put to question before this Court by 31.7.2013 and until the said date further proceedings in Execution Case No.12 of 2011 pending in the court of learned Munsif, Nalanda at Biharsharif shall remain stayed. The judgment debtor-petitioner after handing over the vacant possession of the shop in question to the decree-holder-

¶18

Patna High Court C.R. No.214 of 2011 (7) dt.21-01-2013

¶19

¶20

sole opposite party latest by 31.7.2013 shall file an affidavit to that effect before the executing court on or before 5.8.2013 and upon such affidavit being filed the execution proceedings shall be accordingly disposed of. However, if the judgment debtorpetitioner fails to abide by his undertaking and does not vacate the shop by 31.7.2013, the stay operating in the execution proceedings in Execution Case No.12 of 2011 shall stand vacated and will cease to be effective from 5.8.2013 and the executing court shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. The decree-holder-opposite party shall also have the liberty to take recourse to such remedies as may be available to him under law, in such circumstances.

¶21

With the observations and directions aforesaid this civil revision application is disposed of.

¶22

Let the lower court records received in this Court in connection with the judgment and order under challenge be returned to the learned trial court concerned in a sealed cover forthwith and without any further delay.

¶23

(Jyoti Saran, J)

¶24

SKPathak/-

Md. Ibrar Alam @ Laddu v. Md. Shaukat Ali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Ibrar Alam @ Laddu v. Md. Shaukat Ali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikash Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Kanhaiya Kumar Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Umesh Sah @ Umesh Shaw Vs The State Of Bihar

Mir Mohammad Sajjad Alam @ Mir Sajjed Hussain Vs Md. Istiyaque Hassan

Baldeo Thakur and Anr. Vs Anand Sah and Ors.

Prem Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.