Patna High CourtCWJC/6684/2014disposed

Md. Nasir Hussain v. Basudeo Prasad

2015-01-27Mr. Justice V. Nath2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6684 of 2014 =========================================================== Md. Nasir Hussain Son of Late Md. Sabir Hussain Resident of Drybersion Lane Police Station- Danapur, District- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

Basudeo Prasad Son of Late Prahlad Prasad Resident of Machhua Toli, P.O. And P.S. Danapur, District- Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisuzzoha For the Respondent/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-01-2015 Heard Mr. Raghib Ahsan, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 12.09.2013 passed by the learned court below in Title Eviction Suit No. 04 of 2012.

At the out set, Mr. Raghib Ahsan, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petition has been filed by the defendant-petitioner in the learned court below on the basis of wrong advice and misconception by which the leave was sought as provided under Section 14 (4) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982. It has been submitted that the written statement has already been accepted by the court and, therefore, the

Patna High Court CWJC No.6684 of 2014 dt.27-01-2015 position should be clarified that the petitioner be at liberty to pursue his defence in the suit on the basis of the said written statement. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiffrespondent has raised no objection to the said prayer and has submitted that the written statement has been accepted by the court after imposing cost which has already been paid. In view of the aforesaid submissions and stand taken by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to the learned court below to allow the defendantpetitioner to pursue his defence in the suit on the basis of the written statement which has already been accepted.

As the suit has been filed seeking eviction on the ground of personal necessity, the learned court below is directed to expedite the hearing of the suit and dispose it of the same preferably within a period of six months.

(V. Nath, J) Devendra/- U