JUDGMENT :- This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 11-7-1997 passed by the 9th Additional District Judge, Pune, in Civil Appeal No. 290/1991, confirming the judgment and order dated 12-4-1991 passed by the Principal Judge, Small Causes Court, Pune, in Civil Suit No. 1001/1988, dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff to recover possession of the suit premises from the defendant and directing enquiry regarding mesne profits, in accordance with provisions of Order 20, Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Background Facts:

2. The undisputed background facts brought on record is that one Shri Jivraj Bapuchand Gujarathi was the original owner of the suit property. He had one sister by name Smt. Sonubai Bhalchand Doshi and wife Smt. Putalabai.

3. It appears that Sonubai had adopted a son by name Shri Nemichand Bhaichand Doshi, who had two sons by name Hiralal and Maniklal i.e. original plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2.

4. It further appears that, aforesaid Sonubai, by Will dated 30-11-1968, bequeathed the property of which (Shop) premises formed part; which admeasures (approx.) 190 sq. feet. with backyard admeasuring 100 sq.ft at House No. 331, Sachapir Street, Pune-411 001 ( the ‘suit premises), in favour of her grand sons, the present plaintiffs.

5. Factual matrix further reveals that Smt. Putalabai had also adopted Shri Ashok Mahale as her son. She had filed Civil Suit No. 1242/1946 on 2 July, 1946 against Sonubai claiming that the suit property belonged to her she was the widow of Late Jivaraj Gujarathi. On 30-6-1948 the suit dismissed. Appeal carried. therefore being Civil Appeal No. 268/1950 Putalabai was allowed as a result thereof, Putalabai was declared as owner of suit property. (Ex. 185) .

6. It further appears that on 18-4-1963, one more suit being Suit 370/1963 came to be filed at the instance of Smt. Sonubai against Putalabais son Shri Ashok Mahale for a declaration that he is not a leg adopted son and that she was the only heir of Putalabai (Ex.106). The said came to be dismissed on 15-1-1965 (Ex. 174). Appeal carried therefrom be Civil Appeal No. 220 of 1965 filed Sonubai came to be allowed by judgment order dated 23-2-1967 (Ex.91); that is how, Smt. Sonubai came to be declare legal heir of deceased Putlabai by first Appellate Court.

7. It further appears that sometime in the year 1967; Shri Ashok Mah filed Second Appeal No. 447 of 1967 in this Court challenging above decree. said appeal was admitted by this Court. On 9th October, 1974 Sonubai Sonubai Since no legal heirs were brought on record after Sonubais demise, the SCC Appeal was dismissed as abated, with the result decree passed by first appeal Court in Appeal No. 226/1965 came to be confirmed. Facts leading to present litigation:

8. The cause for the present litigation is the notice dated 22-5-1988 issue by plaintiffs terminating tenancy of the tenant defendant No.2 (Ex.72) un section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act to and calling upon him to hand of vacant possession of the suit premises. The defendant No. 2 replied the s notice by his reply dated 7-6-1988, denying relationship of landlord and ten and questioned title of the plaintiffs (Ex.73). The plaintiffs again replied to defendants reply contending that he was liable to be evicted since he had de title of the plaintiff and, thereby he had forfeited his right to be a tenant of suit premises and consequent protection of Bombay Rent Act.

9. The defendants again replied plaintiffs letter on 26-7-1988 reitera

denial of the title of the landlords/plaintiffs.

10. The aforesaid attack and counter attack resulting in denial of .ultimately led to a suit being Civil Suit No. 1001/1988 for eviction on the ground of disclaimer of title, nuisance, reasonable and bona fide requirement of plaintiffs- landlords.

11. The Judge of the Small Causes Court, Pune, was pleased to decree suit only on the ground of disclaimer of title vide its judgment and order d 12-4-1991. The aforesaid judgment and decr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document