ThisHC dismissed a second appeal filed by a plaintiff challenging eviction proceedings. The court held no substantial question of law existed to disturb the lower courts' finding that no landlord-tenant relationship existed. Appeal rejected.
Second Appeal No. 485 of 2011 dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Second Appeal No.485 of 2011
====================================================== Raghubir Chaudhary son of Late Jageshwar Choudhary, resident of villageMungeriganj, Ward No. 9, Pergana Ballia, P.S. Ballia, District-Begusarai. …..Plaintiff…Appellant….. Appellant/s Versus Mihir Das Gupta son of Mohini Mohan Dass Gupta, resident of villageMungeriganj, under Ward No. 8, Pergana Ballia, P.S. Ballia, DistrictBegusarai Defendant....Respondent.... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 9 01-03-2013 Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
Patna High Court SA No.485 of 2011 (9) dt.01-03-2013
2 / 4
State Government of Bihar also issued rent receipt in the name of the father of the original plaintiff. After settlement, the original plaintiff built a brick house and came in possession. The said house was subsequently let out to the respondent / defendant on monthly rent on 01.01.1990. It was pleaded that the said monthly rent was paid to the plaintiff continuously. In course of time, there being increase in number of members in the family, personal necessity of the plaintiff arose for the occupation of the house. On
a request made for vacating the house the defendant refused, giving rise to cause of action to the plaintiff to file the eviction suit.
“Whether there is relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff and the respondent?”
Patna High Court SA No.485 of 2011 (9) dt.01-03-2013
3 / 4
original plaintiff died and in place of whom the present appellant got himself substituted as plaintiff. Evidences were adduced on behalf of both the parties. Learned Trial Court on the basis of such evidence both oral and documentary decided issue No. III against the plaintiff recording the finding that there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the plaintiff and defendant and dismissed the suit. Thereafter appellant field an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by learned Trial Court which was registered as T.A. No. 15 of 2008 in the file of Additional District Judge, F.T.C. Vth , Begusarai.”
Patna High Court SA No.485 of 2011 (9) dt.01-03-2013
4 / 4
concurrent finding of facts unless the same are shown to be perverse, without evidence and contrary to the material available on record.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.)
Saif/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether substantial question of law arises permitting interference with concurrent findings of fact by courts below under Section 100 CPC.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Raghubir Chaudhary
Mihir Das Gupta
Chakradhari Sharan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
