IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA S.A. No.282 of 2008 Sardar Ekbal Singh @ Sardar Ikbal Singh son of Sardar Mohan Singh of M/s New Janta Crockery, Ram Krishna Avenue (Nala Road) of Mohalla Kadamkuan, P.S. Kadamkuan, District and town Patna. ……….Defendant-Appellant-Appellant. Versus Raj Ranjan Prasad, son of late Sachidanand Prasad, resident of Uma Homeo Clinic, opposite Angan Apartment, Congress Maidan Road Kadamkuan, P.O. and P.S. Kadamkuan, in the town and district of Patna. ………..Plaintiff-Respondent-Respondent. For the appellant : M/s Dhrub Narayan, Sr. Advocate and Shyameshwar Dayal, Advocate. For the respondent : None. ----------- 06/ 25.03.2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This second appeal has been filed by the sole defendant-appellant-appellant challenging the judgments and decree of both the learned courts below. 3. The matter arises out of Eviction Suit No.38 of 1997, which was filed by the sole plaintiff-respondent-respondent for a decree of eviction against the defendant on the ground of default in payment of rent and breach of terms of tenancy as well as for arrears of rent and for other ancillary reliefs. 4. The said eviction suit was decreed on contest with cost by the learned Munsif-III, Patna vide his judgment and decree dated 10.12.2002. Against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the trial court the defendant filed Title Appeal No.02 of 2003, which was dismissed without cost by the learned Additional District Judge- IV, Patna vide his judgment and decree dated 16.07.2008. The aforesaid judgments and decree of the learned courts below are 2 under challenge in the instant second appeal. 5. From the arguments as well as from the materials on record, including the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below, it is quite apparent that relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties is not in a serious dispute and the learned courts below found that there was relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. Both the learned courts below also found that the rent of the suit premises was Rs.45.00 per month, which was used to be paid by the defendant to the representative of the landlord, who granted receipts. It was also found from the record that the said Ramesh Babu granted receipts to the defendant in December, 1991 and receipt of January, 1992 (Ext.2/L) was not given to the defendant and is still intact. The learned courts below further found that the materials on record went to show that no rent was paid by the defendant and even the postal acknowledgement (Ext.A) produced by defendant was not legal and genuine, as it was blank on the space of post office seal and was without any date also and no postal receipt with respect thereto was produced. In the said circumstances, the learned courts below were fully justified in discarding the said frivolous acknowledgement. 6. The learned courts below also rightly held that defendant cannot take advantage of pendency of any case for fixation of rent and the tenant must pay the prevailing monthly rent to the landlord until finally fixed by the House Controller or the Collector, under the provisions of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent & 3 Eviction) Control Act. It was also found by the learned courts below that the defendant failed to produce any specific proof regarding payment of monthly rent and merely on account of some oral evidence, which was sufficiently disproved by plaintiffs’ witnesses, it cannot be established that he had paid monthly rent to the said Ramesh Babu. In the said circumstances, the learned courts below rightly came to the conclusion that defendant defaulted in payment of rent for more than two months and hence he was liable to be evicted from the suit premises. 7. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court does not find any illegality in the impugned judgments and decree of the learned courts below nor does it find any substantial question of law involved in the instant second appeal, which is accordingly dismissed at this stage of hearing under Order XLI Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. harish/ ( S.N.Hussain, J.)