1. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1A to 1C. The petitioner is the original tenant and the respondent is the original landlord. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as the ‘landlord’ and the ‘tenant’. The landlord filed the civil suit for eviction of the tenant on the ground of default, permanent construction and nuisance. The tenant had filed the written-statement and contended that western side of the wall of the suit premises was in completely dilapidated condition and as such the Municipal Corporation issued notice on 26-1-1976 to the landlord asking him to repair the said wall. It was alleged that since repairs were not carried out by the landlord, the Corporation removed the western side of the wall in July 1976. The tenant, therefore, was constrained to carry out repairs and spent an amount of Rs. 30,000/-towards re-construction. He also filed a suit in the Court of Small Causes, seeking recovery of expenses, incurred by him for the re-construction of the said structure. Said suit, however, was dismissed for want of prosecution on 31-12-1994.

2. T