Since the deed was number executed in accordance with the requirements of law it remained inoperative.
The appellant denied the allegation that he has defaulted in payment of rent.
On appeal by the appellant, the learned Subordinate Judge reversed the find ing on the question of bona fide personal necessity but affirmed the decree on the ground of default.
Presumably in view of the fact that the lease deed companyld number be treated to be valid in the eye of law, a prayer for withdrawal of the relief for eviction was made by the plain tiff and was allowed with leave to file a fresh suit.
A decree for arrears of rent, however, was passed.
From the Judgment and Order dated 19.5.1982 of the Patna High Court in Appellate Decree No.
After the period was over, Janki Devi institut ed a suit on 10.12.1968 for eviction of the appellant and for a decree for arrears of rent for the period May to August 1968, which was registered as Title Suit No.
The Bihar Rent Act was number then applicable to Danaput Cantonment.
The first appellate companyrt on a companysideration of the evidence held that the appellant did default in payment of rent for May, June, July, October and November 1968, and December 1969 to February 1970, and on that basis decreed the suit.
3 17 of 1968.
The High Court has by the impugned judgment maintained the decree.
275 of 1981.
During the pendency of the case on 14.2.1970 the provisions of the Bihar Rent Act were extended to this area.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The present suit was filed on 28.5.1974 for eviction of the appellant on the grounds of bona .fide personal necessity and default in payment of rent for the periods May to July, October and November 1968, December 1969 to Febru ary 1970, and December 1973 to April 1974.
The trial companyrt decreed the suit on both the grounds.
The appellant was inducted as a tenant therein by the owner one Janki Devi under a document of lease for a fixed period.
The building in question is in Danapur Cantonment area near the town of Patna.
2984 of 1983.
Govind Mukhoty and K.N. Rai for the Appellant.
S. Nariman and Ranjit Kumar for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHARMA, J. The question which arises in this appeal by special leave is whether the default by a tenant in payment of rent for the period before the Bihar Buildings Lease, Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the Bihar Rent Act , was extended and became applicable, can be the basis for holding him a defaulter within the meaning of clause d of s. 11 1 of the Bihar Rent Act, 1947 and, therefore, liable to be evicted.
