Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4) The plaintiff filed a petition under Section 15 of the Bihar Building (Least, Rent and Eviction) Control Act (hereinafter referred to as „BBC Act‟) for payment of arrears of rent.

5) The petitioner-defendant 1st set filed rejoinder and stated that on 05.10.1989, he took the suit property on lease for 11 years from defendant No.2, Sri Madhukar Sharma. The land was vacant. The petitioner used the vacant land by constructing a shed as godown and contended that according to the lease deed, the suit land was vacant and the provision of BBC Act is not applicable.

7) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the lease deed, it would appear that the petitioner took the vacant land and thereafter the lessee, the petitioner, constructed Godown. Therefore, the vacant land cannot be defined as building under BBC Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed his reliance on a Division Bench Judgment of the Patna High Court reported in 1979 (27) 139 Braj Kishore Singh Vs. Commissioner of Bhagalpur. The learned counsel for the petitioner further placed his reliance on another Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ms. Ashok Chitra Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The State of Bihar 1993 (1) PLJR 524 in which it has been held that Section 2b of the BBC Act, the term „building‟ has been defined as "Building" means any building or hut a part of the building or hut, let or to be let separately for residential or non-residential purpose and includes the garden, grounds and out houses, if any appurtenant to such building or hut or part of such building or hut and any furniture supplied by the landlord for use in such building or hut or part of a building or hut. A bare perusal of the definition shows that the word „building‟ as defined above does not include within its ambit any vacant piece of land.‟ It is further Patna High Court C.M isc. No.970 of 2016 dt.09-01-2018 submitted that in the aforesaid case, the landlord leased out the vacant land to one Dayashanker Sharma by registered deed of lease leasing out for 25 years with an option for renewal for another 25 years. Their 1/5th share was allowed to be constructed a cinema hall and for using the same for public entertainment or such other structure as the leasee to construct industrial or commercial or residential purposes. The leasee after taking lease constructed the building and the lessor filed petition for enhancing of rent and on such facts, it was held by Division Bench of this Court that on the basis of lease of vacant land, the petition for enhancing of rent under the BBC Act is not maintainable.

8) The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention further placed reliance on the judgment reported in AIR 1966 SC 1024 Krishnapasuba Rao Kundapur Vs. Dattatraya Krishnaji Karani.

9) On the contrary, Sri Mahesh Narain Parwat, the learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent, submitted that admittedly the plaintiff respondent purchased the land from defendant 2nd set by virtue of sale deed dated 27.10.2008. In the sale deed itself, the full distinction of the land and the building standing thereon are mentioned and described. The plaintiff filed the eviction suit after determination of lease and due to non-payment of rent. The plaintiff filed petition Patna High Court C.M isc. No.970 of 2016 dt.09-01-2018 under Section 15 of the BBC Act for payment of arrears of rent. The plaintiff has very specifically given description of the suit land and the house standing thereon. Therefore, the suit under the BBC Act is maintainable. The learned counsel placed his reliance on the judgment reported in 2000 (2) PLJR 865 Shri Binay Kumar Maheshwari Vs. Fanindra Prasad Mishra and the another judgment reported in 2007(3) PLJR 582 (Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rajeshwar Prasad). It is further submitted that Supreme Court in para 9 and 10 of M/s. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. Vs. Govindas Purushothamdas reported in AIR 2001 SC 1387 has held as under :-

10) It is submitted that in view of the aforesaid law laid down by the Apex Court, the suit under the BBC Act is maintainable.

11) On the basis of the submissions of both sides, the sole question arises whether the provisions of the BBC Act would apply on the facts of the case? It is admitted fact that the petitioner took the lands on lease from Madhukar Sharma, the defendant 2nd set on 5.10.1989. The Clause 2 of the lease contains the covenants to pay the rent as aforesaid and constructed Godown as per his convenience and not to sublet or assign the said without the previous consent of the lessor in writing. It is further agreed that the lease would not alter the premises or to construct any permanent structure thereon after construction of the Godowns without the consent of the Lessor in writing. The lease further agreed not to use Godown or any part of thereon for any illegal or immoral purpose. According to the Clause-3 of the aforesaid lease Patna High Court C.M isc. No.970 of 2016 dt.09-01-2018 deed, the Lessor is to pay the land revenue in respect of the said house (Godown), to white wash the Godown every alternative years. From perusal of the aforesaid lease deed, it would appear that in the lease deed itself, it is stated that there is a Godown on the land and the revenue of the land including the Godown was to be paid by the Lessor.