JUDGMENT :- This is a appeal from the concurrent Courts below decreeing the landlord's suit for recovery of arrears of rent. The plaintiff-respondent Ambika Prasad alleged that the defendant's father took the house in question from him on rent at the rate of Rs. 10 per month and executed a kirayanama for one year, and that after their fathers' death the defendants were in possession as tenants but had failed to pay the rent. They alleged that the original rent was enhanced to Rs. 12-8-0 after the house was laid with electricity. They claimed Rs. 75 (sic) as arrears of rent from 19-2-1953 to 18-12-1957.

The defendants resisted the suit and denied that the plaintiff was the owner of the house or that his father executed any kirayanama. He alleged that his father had been occupying the house for 20 years and perfected his title by adverse possession.

The trial Court held that the plaintiff was not the owner of the house but the ownership was not material to the question whether a relationship of landlord and tenant existed between the parties. It held that this relationship did exist and the plaintiff was the landlord of the defendant. It passed a decree for three years' rent, holding t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document