Ownership rights in ancestral property, failure to establish landlord-tenant relationship justified eviction.

JUDGMENT :

V. SRISHANANDA, J.

1. Heard Sri Jagan Mohan M.T. learned counsel for the appellant and Sri K.P.Chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. Defendant is questioning the validity of the judgment and decree dated 25.11.2023 passed in O.S.No.264/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Chitradurga, confirmed in R.A No.13/2024 dated 28.04.2025 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chitradurga, whereby defendant was directed to vacate and hand over the possession of the property to the plaintiff within six months from the date of decree and to pay rent of Rs.1,000/- per month from 05.12.2014 till the date of suit by deducting the advance amount of Rs.10,000/-.

3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under:

A suit for eviction came to be filed in respect of following property by the plaintiff contending that suit property is the ancestral property of the plaintiff which has fallen to the share of his grandfather by name Thimmappa.

Description:

“The part and parcel of tiles and zinc sheet roofed old house with site property bearing Chitradurga Town Municipal Old Door Nos.1016 and 964 for its Assessment Khata No.159/ 1602/1016, measuring East-West 42 feet and North-South 47 feet and the same is situated second block, old higher primary school and Khaji Moholla Road, Chitradurga Town, Taluk and District. Out of this Eastt- West: 42 feet and the North-South: 23 and half feet only and the same is bounded on East by: Road, West by: Road, North by: Remaining 42 x 23 and half feet tails and zink sheet roofed old house with site property in the same assessment khata No.159/1602/2016 which belongs to plaintiff and the same has been given to one Thimmakka, w/o Ramanna on rent basis, South by: house property belongs to daughter in law of Mahalingappa.”

4. After the death of Thimmappa, khatha of the schedule property stood transferred to the name of grandmother of the plaintiff by name Kenchamma, mother of the plaintiff by name Sumangalamma and uncle by name Madhukar.

5. It is further contended that Sumangalamma and Rajagopala are the parents of the plaintiff. After the death of Kenchamma and Sumangalamma, uncle of the plaintiff by name Madhukar and mother of the plaintiff Sumangalamma have given up their rights in respect of the suit property in the year 2004 and thereafter, katha of the suit property were transferred into the name of the plaintiff and as such he has become the absolute owner of the suit property.

6. It is also contended by the plaintiff that on 05.02.2013 defendant approached the plaintiff to let out the suit property on monthly rental basis and plaintiff agreed for the same.

7. As per the oral agreement, fixed the rate of rent at Rs.3,000/- and defendant paid advance amount of Rs.10,000/- on 05.02.2013 and took possession of the suit property and thereafter he is in possession of the suit property as tenant.

8. It is further contended that the defendant stopped paying the rentals and therefore, plaintiff demanded the defendant to pay the rent or to vacate the premises.

9. But defendant refused for the same and therefore plaintiff issued legal notice on 14.12.2015 calling upon the defendant to pay the arrears of Rs.36,000/- and vacate the suit property.

10. Defendant has given an untenable reply and therefore suit was filed.

11. Upon receipt of the suit summons, defendant appeared and filed detailed written statement denying the relationship.

12. Learned Trial Judge after raising necessary issues recorded the evidence of the parties and decreed the suit of the plaintiff granting six months time and to pay arrears of rent at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month from 05.12.2014 till the da