IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.2344 of 2006 MD.IMRAN Versus VIJAY PRASAD ----------- For the petitioner :- Mr. Pushker Narain Shahi and Mr. Sujeet Kumar Singh For the opposite party :- Mr. Amitabh Bhardwaj 10 16.10.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the opposite party. This Civil Revision application is directed against the judgment dated 24.11.2006 in Eviction Suit No. 2 of 2005 decreeing the suit filed by the plaintiff-opposite party and directing eviction of the petitioner from a shop measuring 8 ft. X 2 ft. in Mohalla- Marwari Bazar, Ward No. 5(old), 17 (new) Samastipur town. While Mr. Pushker Narain Shahi, learned counsel for the petitioner, had made his submission on various scores while assailing the impugned order, he ultimately had confined his submission only to the issue of partial eviction. He has in this regard submitted that once a suit was filed seeking eviction of the petitioner on the ground of personal necessity it was mandatory on the part of the Court below to consider the plea of partial eviction. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party had tried to defend the impugned order by making a submission that true it was the suit was also - 2 - decreed on the ground of personal necessity but then there was a finding that the petitioner, the defendant- tenant was also a defaulter and therefore, if the suit was decreed on two grounds there was no requirement of recording a finding on partial eviction. In the opinion of this Court, counsel for the opposite party does not seem to be correct in law inasmuch as Section 11 mandates that the moment the suit is decreed on the ground of personal necessity, there has to be a finding with regard to partial eviction. That being not so, this Court would set aside the impugned order only on the ground that a finding on the issue of partial eviction has not been recorded. Consequently, all the other findings arrived by the Court below in the impugned judgment are not disturbed and infact upheld and only the concluding portion therein directing the eviction of the petitioner is hereby set aside. The trial Court is hereby directed to frame an issue of partial eviction, allow the parties to lead their evidence on the issue of partial eviction only and pass an appropriate order within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and directions this Civil Revision application is allowed. Bibhash (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)