JUDGMENT

Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, J. (Oral)

CM-5173-C-2023

This is an application for condonation of delay of 58 days in re-filing the present appeal.

For reasons mentioned in the application the same is allowed as prayed for and delay of 58 days in re-filing the present appeal is condoned.

CM-5174-C-2023

This is an application filed by the petitioner under section 151 CPC for exemption from filing the true typed/certified/legible copies of judgements and decrees dated 27.11.2020 & 01.02.2023 passed by the courts below along with the grounds of appeal.

The application is allowed as prayed for.

RSA No. 1386 of 2023

This is the regular second appeal filed by the appellant/defendant challenging the judgement and decree passed by the lower appellate court whereby the judgement and decree passed by the trial court dismissing the suit for possession filed by the respondent/plaintiff, has been reversed and the said suit has been ordered to be decreed.

2. For the purpose of the present appeal, the parties would be referred to as they were described in the original suit.

3. The brief facts, as available on the file are that the plaintiff filed a suit for possession of the house measuring 150 Square Yards, i.e., 3 biswas, 3/53 share of plot measuring 02 bighas 13 Biswas comprising in Khewat No.1660, Khatauni No.8920 Khasra Nos. 4931 min (I-I3V2) 4931 min (0-10V2) 4931 min (0-9). The plaintiff asserted therein that the house in question was purchased by him vide a sale deed. Further, the house in question was owned by Mohammad Islam. However, Mohammad Islam mortgaged the said house with plaintiff vide mortgage deed No.6683 dated 23.12.2013 for ^1,00,000/-. Later on Mohammad Islam sold the house in question to the plaintiff vide sale deed No. 1293 dated 26.05.2015 with physical possession. Since then the plaintiff had been in possession of the house. The defendant, being a widow requested the plaintiff to allow her to stay on the first floor of the house in question for few months; on the assurance that she was searching for another house for living and that she will vacate the house after getting another accommodation. She also agreed to compensate the plaintiff in monetary terms with Rs. 6,000/- per month. Accordingly, she was put in possession of the first floor of the house and the remaining portion was lying locked under the key and control of the plaintiff. The son of the plaintiff was seriously ill and was suffering from cancer, therefore, the plaintiff was busy in getting his son treated from Bathinda and thereafter from PGI, Chandigarh. The defendant took advantage of absence of the plaintiff and broke open the locks of ground floor of the house and took illegal possession of ground floor and of the remaining portion of the house in question; as well. On being requested by the plaintiff to handover the vacant possession, instead of vacating the house the defendant started threatening the plaintiff with transfer of possession in the name of some third person. Accordingly, the suit was filed claiming possession, as well as; recovery of mesne profits @ Rs. 6000/- from the date of filing of the suit till the delivery of the possession of the same to the plaintiff.

4. On being put to notice the defendant appeared through the counsel, however, chose not to file any written statement. In the evidence the plaintiff examined PW-1 Kulvir Singh, the Registry Clerk of office of Sub-Registrar, who proved the sale deed Exhibits P-l & P-2 in favour of the plaintiff. PW-2 Jagdish Singh, was examined qua the details and title of the property. PW-3 Sham Lai was examined to prove the assertions made in the plaint qua temporary handing over the possession of the property to the defendant. The plaintiff himself appear