Jharkhand High Court
The New Bombay Stores vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 4 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No.3546 of 2022
With
I.A. No.6836 of 2022
-----
The New Bombay Stores, Bistupur, Jamshedpur. .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
State of Jharkhand & Ors. .......... Respondents.
-----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Vipul Poddar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Amit Mishra, A.C. to Sr. S.C.II
For Res. No.3 : Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, Advocate
-----
Order No.03 Date: 04.08.2022
At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, defect no.1,
as pointed out by the office, is ignored for the present.
So far as the defect no.2 is concerned, counsel for the petitioner
undertakes to remove the same by filing a supplementary affidavit
before the next date fixed.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letter
no.81/TL dated 25th February, 2022 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition)
issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Law & Order-cum-In-
charge Officer, Tata Lease, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur- respondent
no.2 addressed to the Narbheram and Company Private Limited-
respondent no.4, informing inter alia that the action of demolition of
old building and construction of new building would be made after
obtaining approval from the office of the respondent no.3. Further
prayer has been made for restraining the respondents from forcefully
and illegally dispossessing the petitioner from Shop nos.8 and 9,
situated in a portion of the building, known as "Narbheram Building",
at Sakchi Boulevard Road, Bistupur, Jamshedpur.
I.A. No.6836 of 2022 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner
for staying the implementation/operation of the letter no.81/TL dated
25th February, 2022 issued by the respondent no.2 and also for
restraining the respondents from forcibly and illegally dispossessing
the petitioner from shop nos.8 and 9, situated at a portion of the
building in question.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was inducted as a tenant by the respondent no.4 with respect to shop
nos.8 and 9, situated at a portion of the building in question. During
the aforesaid tenancy, a lease in favour of the respondent no.5-
Narbheram Leasing and Company Pvt. Limited was granted by the
respondent no.4 with respect to a portion of the building in question.
Thereafter, the respondent no.4 sent a letter to the petitioner on 27 th
May, 1999, directing it to deposit monthly rent along with electricity
and water charges to the respondent no.5. Pursuant to the said letter,
the petitioner started paying monthly rent of shop nos.8 & 9 to the
respondent no.5 since 1999.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in the
year 2004, the respondent no.5 (plaintiff) and the respondent no.4
(proforma defendant) filed a suit being Eviction Suit no.03 of 2004
against the petitioner under Section 11(1)(c) read with Section 14 of
the Jharkhand Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011 in
the court of Sub Judge-I, Jamshedpur. Subsequently, the lease with
respect to a portion of the building in question, which was originally
granted by the respondent no.4 in favour of the respondent no.5, was
revoked and, thereafter, a fresh registered deed of lease was executed
by the respondent no.4 in favour of the respondent no.6 on 4th
January, 2007. During pendency of the aforesaid eviction proceeding,
the respondent no.6 along with the respondent no.5 sometimes in the
year 2007 started demanding rent from the petitioner for the tenanted
premises. Thereafter, the petitioner filed H.R.C. Case no.47 of 2007
before the House Rent Controller-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate,
Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur under Section 19 of the Bihar Building (Lease,
Rent & Eviction) Control Act. After hearing the parties, the House Rent
Controller-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dhalbhum, Jamshedpur
directed the petitioner to deposit rent in the said Court by way of
treasury challan until a competent court decides status of landlord of
the tenanted premises and, accordingly, the petitioner had been
depositing monthly rent in the said Court through treasury challan till
May, 2012. In the meanwhile, the said eviction suit was decreed vide
judgment and decreed dated 15th December, 2017 passed by the Civil
Judge (Sr. Division)- VI, Jamshedpur, directing the petitioner to
handover vacant possession of the tenanted premises to the
respondent no.5. Aggrieved with the said judgment and decree, the
petitioner preferred Civil Revision no.03 of 2018 before this Court,
which was allowed by a Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 4 th
April, 2019 and the judgment and decree dated 15 th December,
2017 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division)-VI, Jamshedpur in
Eviction Suit no.03 of 2004 was set aside. Consequently, the aforesaid
eviction suit filed by the respondent nos.4 and 5 was dismissed.
Aggrieved with the said judgment dated 4th April, 2019, the
respondent nos.4 and 5 preferred an S.L.P. being S.L.P. No.14583 of
2019 before the Supreme Court, which is still pending. Subsequently,
the petitioner came to know that the respondent no.4 has got a
building plan sanctioned by the respondent no.3 with respect to entire
18,000 approx. sq. ft. of leasehold area including the tenanted
premises. There are altogether ten shops located in eastern side of
Bistupur Main Road, out of which two shops i.e. shop nos.8 and 9
(tenanted premises) are occupied by the petitioner. On 2nd April, 2022,
the respondent nos.4 and 5 started demolishing the structures, which
were adjoining to the tenanted premises. Thereafter, the petitioner
filed a suit for injunction being Original Suit no.68 of 2022 for
restraining the respondent nos.4 and 5 from damaging or demolishing
the tenanted premises. In the said suit, the petitioner also filed a
petition under Order XXXIX Rule 3A CPC for temporary injunction.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a joint
inspection of the building in question was made and on the basis of
joint inspection report, the respondent no.3 issued letter no.3148
dated 24th November, 2021 addressed to the respondent no.4,
mentioning inter alia that only tin shed in which one part of the office
of the respondent no.4 was functioning and another part of the tin
shed being used as its parking were found to be in a dilapidated
condition. However, ignoring the said fact, the impugned letter dated
25th February, 2022 has been issued by the respondent no.2 on the
basis of the said letter dated 24th November, 2021.
Notice.
Mr. Amit Mishra, learned A.C. to Sr. S.C.II appears and waives
notice on behalf of the respondent nos.1 and 2. He prays for and is
allowed six weeks' time to seek instructions and file counter affidavit
on behalf of the said respondents.
Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, Advocate appears and waives notice on
behalf of the respondent no.3. He also prays for and is allowed six
weeks' time to seek instructions and file counter affidavit on behalf of
the said respondent.
Issue notice to the respondent nos.4 to 6 under registered
cover with A/D as well as ordinary process for which requisites etc.
must be filed within a week.
Put up this case under the heading "For Admission" on 22nd
September, 2022.
Till then, implementation/operation of the impugned letter
dated 25th February, 2022 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) issued by
the respondent no.2 shall remain stayed.
I.A. No.6836 of 2022 is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Sanjay/
