Patna High Court

Ramjee PrasadversusVijay Kumar

Decided: 30 January 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: S B P SINGH

Holding

The application seeking to set aside the amendment was dismissed, as the amendment does not affect the determination of the landlord‑tenant relationship and the trial court may proceed.

Summary

The petitioner filed a civil miscellaneous application challenging an order that allowed the defendant to amend his written statement under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC in an eviction suit. The petitioner argued that the amendment admitted tenancy but contested the plaintiff's claim of absolute ownership of the premises. The respondent contended that the case, governed by the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982, required only a determination of the landlord‑tenant relationship, not the extent of ownership, and that no further evidence would be adduced. The trial court was urged to dispose of the matter promptly, as the amendment would not affect the outcome. The High Court disposed of the application, effectively refusing to interfere with the trial court’s order.

Issues considered

Whether the amendment to the written statement under Order VI Rule 17 CPC can be allowed at the stage of final arguments.
Whether the court must examine the ownership/share of the landlord or merely the existence of a landlord‑tenant relationship under the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982.
Whether the amendment would prejudice the trial or affect the final outcome of the eviction suit.

Legislation cited

Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982

Subjects

landlord-tenant relationship
amendment of written statement
Order VI Rule 17 CPC
eviction suit
Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act
civil miscellaneous application

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION No.330 of 2025
                                                       In
                                     CIVIL REVISION No.177 of 2024
                 ======================================================
                 Ramjee Prasad Son of Late Bainath Sao, Resident of Mohalla - Bakarganj,
                 Gola Raod, P.O. - Bankipur, P.S. Pirbahore, District- Patna.

                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 Vijay Kumar Son of Late Prayag Sao, Resident of Mohalla - Bakarganj, Gola
                 Road, P.O. - Bankipur, P.S. - Pirbahore, District- Patna.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s   :    Mr.Upendra Mishra
                 For the Respondent/s   :    Mr.Mrigendra Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   30-01-2026                 The instant civil miscellaneous application has

                   been filed against the order dated 18.09.2024 passed in Title

                   Eviction Suit No. 96 of 2011 by learned Civil Judge (SD)

                   IV, Patna whereby the amendment application by way of

                   amendment in the written statement filed by the defendant

                   under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC has been allowed.

                               2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,

                   in Annexure-1, (the amendment petition) the defendant has

                   clearly admitted that he is a tenant of the suit premises;

                   however, it is specifically contended that the plaintiff is not

                   the absolute owner/landlord of the triple-storied house

                   bearing No. 73/65, Circle No. 9, Ward No. 37.
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.330 of 2025(4) dt.30-01-2026
                                             2/3




                       3. It is further submitted that the present case has

          been filed under the provisions of the Bihar Buildings

          (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982, wherein the

          Court is required to examine only whether the relationship

          of landlord and tenant exists in respect of the suit property

          or not? The extent of the ownership or the total share of any

          party is not required to be examined and it is not an issue in

          the present case.

                       4. Moreover, learned counsel for the respondent

          submits that he is not inclined to adduce any further oral or

          documentary evidence, which fact has also been recorded in

          the impugned order. Since the case is at the stage of final

          arguments. Hence the proposed amendment is not going to

          create any hindrance or affect the outcome of the case in

          any manner, because the title or share of the landlord in

          respect of the suit property is not under consideration. The

          only issue to be decided in this case is the existence of the

          relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties.

                       5. In the above circumstance, learned Trial Court

          is requested to dispose of this matter as early as possible

          preferably within a period of two months. Both the parties
          Patna High Court C.Misc. No.330 of 2025(4) dt.30-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                    are also directed to diligently co-operate in the trial.

                                 6. With the aforesaid, the instant application

                    stands disposed of.



                                                (S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-

U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…