AMARESHWAR SAHAY,J. - (1.)THE petitioner/defendant has filed this revision application under Section 14(8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as B.B.C. Act) against the judgment dated 6th May, 2009, passed by the Sub -Judge -VI, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 18A1 2003 by which the Decree for eviction of the defendant from the suit premises has been passed by the Trial Court.
(2.)THE said Eviction Suit was instituted by the Plaintiff on the ground of bona fide personal necessity. According to the Plaintiff, the Schedule -A premises was initially let out to the grandfather of the Defendant who started business over the said property. After death of his father, the Defendant stepped into the shoes of his father as a tenant. Further, according to the Plaintiff, out of his six sons, two sons were employed but the remaining sons were unemployed and, therefore, the Plaintiff required the suit premises for the purpose of their self -employment. Even a Panchayati was held and in the said Panchayati, the father of the Defendant had agreed to vacate the suit premises but after his death, the sons i.e. the Defendants, refused to vacate the same.
The Defendants, by filing written statements in the Court below, contested the suit by contending that the B.B.C. Act was not applicable in the case since the father of the Plaintiff had let out a "Parti' land to the grandfather of the Defendant and in a case of "Parti" land, B.B.C. Act does not apply. Further, there was no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. A building was constructed by the grandfather of the Defendant and the Plaintiff did not have any personal necessity since his sons were already employed. The Defendant's father never agreed to vacate the suit premises.

(3.)ON the basis of the pleadings of the patties, five Issues were framed by the Trial Court out of which, Issue Nos. 3 and 4 are most relevant, which are as under -
"3. Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to get a Decree for eviction of the Plaintiff from the suit premises on the ground of bona fide personal necessity and whether, its partial eviction would suffice its purpose?
4. Whether there is any relationship of landlord and tenant between both the parties -