IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.162 of 2007 1. MD.MOAZZAM ALI 2. Md. Azam 3. Md. Miraz 4. Md. Sarfaraz All sons of late Gulam Rasul and R/o Mohalla Konasarai, Kasan Tola, Town, P.S. Biharsharif, P.S. Laheri, District Nalanda …… Appellants Versus 1. SUSHIL DEVI, W/o Sharwan Kumar 2. Rajendra Kumar, Son of Sharwan, Kumar Both residents of Mohalla Murarpur, Chandani Town & P.O. Bihar Sharif, P.S. Laheri, District Nalanda … Respondents ----------- 9 12.08.2009 Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the appellants as also Mr. Amaranth Singh, learned counsel for the respondents. The grievance of the appellants against whom Eviction Suit No. 9 of 1999 had been filed on the ground of personal necessity, is that the landlord could not have filed a Title Appeal against the impugned judgment of the eviction suit since sub- section (8) of Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) does not permit filing of an appeal against the judgment and decree passed under section 14 of the Act on the grounds of eviction under sub clause (c) and (e) of sub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Act. The trial court decreed the suit by holding that on finds the tenanted premises could be partitioned half and half between the landlord and the tenant. However, there was no finding of the trial court as to whether partial eviction of the tenanted premises would suit the personal requirement of the premises by the 2 landlord. The lower appellate court framed a single issue namely whether partial eviction of the suit premises will be practical or not and decided the issue in favour of the plaintiffs appellants and set aside the partial eviction recorded by the learned trial court. The other issues raised by the learned counsel for the appellants relate to concurrent findings of fact which could not be looked into in a second appeal. I find no apparent illegality or impropriety on the part of the lower appellate court, nor is there any substantial questions of law which is required to be decided in the second appeal. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)