Jharkhand High Court
R.K.Sharma vs Mahesh Prasad Gupta & Ors on 26 April, 2010
Author: Prashant Kumar
Bench: Prashant Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Civil Revision No. 24 of 2009
...
R.K. Sharma ... ... Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
Mahesh Kumar Gupta and Others ... ... Opp. Parties
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR.
...
For the Petitioner : - Mr. M.K. Laik, Advocate.
For the Opp. Parties : - Mr. Rohit Roy, Advocate.
...
8/26.04.2010This civil revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26.05.2009 and 29.05.2009 respectively passed by Additional Munsif-I, Dhanbad in Eviction Suit No. 55 of 2004 whereby and whereunder he directed the petitioner to vacate the suit premises within two months from the date of judgment.
Sri. M.K. Laik, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the learned court below has not given any finding with regard to the partial eviction and therefore, the judgment is bad and liable to be set aside.
On the other hand, Sri. Rohit Roy, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties submits that at paragraph no. 11 of the judgment, the learned court below has given finding with regard to the partial eviction. Thus, there is no illegality in the order. Hence, he submits that this civil revision is liable to be rejected.
Having heard the submissions, I have gone through the record of the case. At paragraph no. 11, the learned court below had given a finding that the opposite party no. 4 Ganesh Kumar Gupta wants to open a sweet shop in the suit premises as described in Schedule-'B' and the said business cannot run together with the business of petitioner-defendant, therefore, by partial eviction the personal necessity of plaintiff cannot be fulfilled.
In view of the aforesaid finding of the court below the submission of Sri. Laik appears to be incorrect. Thus, I find no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment. Accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed.
(Prashant Kumar, J.) Sunil/