Dismissed

Chandra Bindu Singh v. Surendra Prasad Singh and Anr.

Patna HC9 Dec 2016CWJC/14848/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, identified as a tenant in an eviction suit, challenged the District Court's order under the Bihar Building Construction Control Act levying rent arrears. The High Court found the finding of fact regarding tenant status was unchallenged and the legal consequence valid. Consequently, the writ discretion under Article 226 was declined.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissing the writ petition challenging the eviction order and rent payment directive.

Chandra Bindu Singh Vs Surendra Prasad Singh and Anr. — Landlord and Tenant | Patna HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14848 of 2013

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Chandra Bindu Singh S/O Late Faujdar Singh Resident Of Village And P.O- Umsanchak, P.S- Masaurhi, District- Patna, At Present Chandra Medical Halla, Taregana Gola, Station Road, Masaurhi, District- Patna.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Surendra Prasad Singh S/O Late Deo Sharan Singh Resident Of Taregana Gola, Station Road, Masaurhi, P.O- Masaurhi, District- Patna.

¶7

Ram Kumari Devi W/O Rajendra Prasad Resident Of VillageSubdullahchak, P.O- Poyawan, P.S- Masaurhi, District- Patna.

¶8

.... .... Respondents

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Ms. Kiran Kumari For the Respondent/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 09-12-2016 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶11

The tenant-defendant in the suit for eviction is the petitioner in this application questioning the legal sustainability of the impugned order passed under Section 15 of the BBC Act.

¶12

The fact has not been disputed that the petitioner’s claim for title over the suit land has been negatived up to this Court in separately instituted civil suit. The learned Court below has come to the finding that there is no explanation by the petitioner as to in what capacity the petitioner is continuing in occupation of the suit premises. The petitioner’s case that the petitioner is in occupation as tenant on monthly rent of RS. 200/- has been accepted by the learned court below and, accordingly, direction under Section 15 of the BBC Act has been passed for payment of arrears of rent and current rent.

¶13

Patna High Court CWJC No.14848 of 2013 (3) dt.09-12-2016

¶14

¶15

During the course of submission, this Court has not been persuaded to hold that the findings recorded by the learned court below and the directions given there under are not in accordance with law.

¶16

This Court, therefore, is not inclined to invoke its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in view of the fact also that the learned Counsel for the petitioner has expressed his inability to inform this Court regarding compliance of the direction as contained in the impugned order for payment of arrears of rent and current rent.

¶17

This application is accordingly dismissed.

¶18

(V. Nath, J.)

¶19

Snkumar/-

¶20

Chandra Bindu Singh v. Surendra Prasad Singh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandra Bindu Singh v. Surendra Prasad Singh and Anr.

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

Rahim Bux and Anr. Vs Abdul Khalique and Ors.

Meena Gupta Vs Pramod Kumar Gupta and Ors.

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs The State Election Commissioner and Ors.

Chhathu Singh Vs Mostt. Marchhia and Ors.

Guleshwar Devi @ Gayatri Devi Vs Devendra Prasad Singh and Ors.

Yogi Paswan and Anr. Vs Ram Narayan @ Ramdeo Kumar and Ors.