Small Causes Court decree in eviction suit is not nullity despite disputed tenancy, as court competent to adjudicate relationship; execution objections under Section 47 CPC cannot reopen merits.

JUDGMENT :

Ashish Naithani, J.

The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the legality and correctness of the order dated 19.09.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehradun in execution proceedings, and the revisional order dated 12.10.2015 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Dehradun, whereby the objections raised by the Petitioners under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure were rejected and the revision preferred against the said rejection was dismissed.

2. The core controversy pertains to the executability of a decree passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, and whether such decree is without jurisdiction and therefore a nullity, as alleged by the Petitioners.

3. The dispute relates to a portion of property bearing old No. 31/32 (new No. 48), situated at Balliwala Chowk, Dehradun, where the Petitioners claim to be residing for a long period.

4. It is pleaded that the property originally belonged to Col. Ewer James Harrish, and that late Shri Mausam Ali, who was in the employment of the owner, was residing in a part of the property.

5. The property was subsequently transferred by a registered sale deed dated 29.01.1975 in favour of late Shri Raja Ram. It is stated that Mausam Ali thereafter paid rent of Rs. 5 per month to Raja Ram, thereby creating a landlord-tenant relationship.

6. Raja Ram died on 23.11.1981. According to the Petitioners, after his death, his widow Smt. Gaura Devi did not accept Mausam Ali as a tenant, and neither was rent paid nor accepted. The Petitioners therefore contend that no landlord-tenant relationship subsisted thereafter.

7. The property was later transferred in 1983 to Shri Sandeep Sharma and Smt. Madhu Garg, who in turn transferred it through a power of attorney holder to Respondent No. 1 Ashwani Kumar and Respondent No. 2 Vipin Kumar by registered sale deed dated 11.02.1998.

8. The Respondents instituted Suit No. 15 of 1999 before the Judge, Small Causes Court seeking eviction and related reliefs. A decree was passed in their favour.

9. In execution of the said decree, the Petitioners raised objections under Section 47 CPC, contending that the decree passed by the Small Causes Court was without jurisdiction and therefore a nullity and inexecutable.

10. The Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dehradun rejected the objections by order dated 19.09.2015. The Petitioners preferred a revision, which was dismissed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Dehradun by order dated 12.10.2015.

11. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioners have filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of the aforesaid two orders.

12. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the decree passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court is a nullity in the eye of law, as the court lacked inherent jurisdiction to entertain the suit. It is contended that the jurisdiction of the Small Causes Court in eviction matters presupposes the existence of a landlord and tenant relationship, and in the absence of such relationship, the court could not have assumed jurisdiction.

13. It is argued that after the death of Raja Ram in the year 1981, no rent was either paid by late Mausam Ali nor accepted by his widow, and therefore, the contractual relationship of landlord and tenant stood extinguished. It is further contended that the subsequent purchasers could not claim the status of landlords in