Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Heard Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Waliur Rahman, learned counsel for the opposite parties.

2. A tenant under a decree of eviction questions its correctness in the present revision application.

3. This civil revision application has been preferred by the defendant-petitioner against the judgment and decree Patna High Court C.R. No.144 of 2024(8) dt.30-07-2025 dated 04.03.2024, passed in Title Eviction Suit No. 456 of 2014 by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)-III, Patna Sadar. The said decree was passed under Section 11(1)(c) of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BBC Act', for the sake of brevity), on the ground of personal necessity.

4. The plaintiffs-opposite parties are the owners of the suit premises. They instituted the present eviction suit against the defendant-petitioner on two grounds as envisaged under Section 11(1)(c) and Section 11(1)(e) of the BBC Act. It was contended that the suit premises are required reasonably and in good faith by plaintiff no. 1 for her own occupation as she intends to establish a boutique therein with the help of plaintiff no. 3, who is currently unemployed. Further, the plaintiffs also asserted that the lease period has expired. Upon consideration of the pleadings and evidence, the learned Trial Court decreed the suit under Section 11(1)(c) of the BBC Act, holding that the plaintiffs have got bona fide and reasonable personal necessity for the suit premises. The plea for partial eviction was answered in the negative, as it failed to address the plaintiffs' bona fide need.