Sri Pranay Sadhu Khan v. Sri Sachchidanand Prasad Sinha And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5917 of 2014 ======================================================
1. Sri Pranay Sadhu Khan S/O Late Sushanta Sadhu Khan Resident Of Bhatta Bazar, P.S.- Khajanchi Hat, District- Purnia. .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. Sri Sachchidanand Prasad Sinha S/O Ram Chandra Prasad Permanent Resident Of Raipur Koyal Bigha, Via- Asta, P.S.- Tharthari, DistrictNalanda, At Present Resident Of Gangulipara, Bhatta Bazar, P.S.- Khajanchi Hat, District- Purnia.
2. Sri Dilip Kumar Gupta S/O Sri Ram Chandra Gupta By Caste-Hindu, By Profession-Business, Resident Of Mahboob Khan Tola, Purnea, P.S.- Khazanchi Hat, District- Purnia.
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Diwakar Prasad Karn, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vidya Sagar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 31-01-2018 The petitioner before this court is plaintiff of Eviction Suit No.11 of 2000 pending in the Court of 2nd Additional Munsif, Purnea. He has filed this application for quashing the order dated 25.11.2013 whereby and whereunder the petition of the petitioner for striking off the defence of respondents was rejected.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents.
3. The petitioner (plaintiff) filed a petition before the trial court on 05.12.2007 under Section 15 of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction ) Control Act, 1982 praying therein to deposit the arrears of rent as well as current rent at the rate of
Patna High Court CWJC No.5917 of 2014 (4) dt.31-01-2018 Rs.936/- per month from 01.01.2000 till the date of filing of petition. The said petition was allowed on 28.07.2008 and the defendants deposited the rent. The plaintiff filed a petition on 26.07.2013 to strike off the defence of tenant as the defendants failed to deposit rent for the month of July 2009, September 2009, November 2009, January 2010, February 2010, September, 2011, October 2011 and May 2013 in time. The defendants further defaulted in making payment of rent for the month of August 2011. The court below as per the impugned order rejected the petition holding that the defendants deposited the amount through chalan as per direction of the Court. Some of the payments were made after some delay for administrative reason.
The court below relying on ruling reported in 1999 (3) P.L.J.R. 205 has rejected the petition of the plaintiff. In this regard, the learned counsel for the respondents cited ruling reported in A.I.R. 1989 Supreme Court 291 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that the provision under the Act regarding striking off the defence cannot be taken to be mandatory provision of law. The court should consider whether the delay in depositing of rent has been reasonably explained or not.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5917 of 2014 (4) dt.31-01-2018 defendant.
4. In view of above ruling and proposition of law the court below has rightly condoned the delay in depositing the rent of one month by respondents (tenants). The court below has not committed any jurisdictional error in refusing to strike off the defence of the respondents. This writ application is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
(Sanjay Kumar, J) U Harish/-