Ravindra Lal Arya v. Smt. Anupama Devi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12713 of 2014 ===========================================================

1. Ravindra Lal Arya Son of Late Nand Lal Arya

2. Smt. Asha Arya W/o Sri Ravindra Lal Arya Both Resident of Mohalla Phulwari Gali, Patna city, P.S.- Khajekalan, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Smt. Anupama Devi W/o Sri Roushan Kumar resident of Mohalla Phulauri Gali, Patna City, P.O.- Jhauganj City, District- Patna. .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Jha, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. J.S. Arora, Adv, Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv and Mr. G. Pratap =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. NATH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-09-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent.

The legal sustainability of the impugned order by which the learned court below has turned down the prayer of the defendant-petitioners for repair of the house has been questioned in this application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners are the defendants in the suit for eviction filed on the ground of personal necessity alone. From the submission made on behalf of the petitioners, it becomes evident that the petitioners have claimed their own title and entitlement to

Patna High Court CWJC No.12713 of 2014 dt.06-09-2016 possession over the suit house on the basis of agreement for sale entered into between the petitioners and the original owner Sri Nath Mishra where the petitioners have claimed to have paid 80 per cent of the total consideration money to the said original owner. The petitioners have also filed a suit for specific performance of contract on that basis which according to the learned counsel for the petitioners is still pending. The present suit, however, is a suit of limited nature filed under the provisions of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 After considering the submissions and the impugned order, this Court is not inclined to invoke its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for interdicting the impugned order.

The application is, accordingly, dismissed.

However, this order shall not prejudice the petitioner in pursuing his remedies in accordance with law, in the suit, said to have been filed by him.

(V. Nath, J) Ranjan/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N.A.

Uploading Date 28.11.16 Transmission Date N.A.