2002(2) JLJ 312
(SUPREME COURT)
R.C. Lahoti and Ruma Pal, JJ.
Sheela and others v. Firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash
Civil Appeal No. 3965 of 1999; against the judgment of
M.P. High Court in Second Appeal No. 33 of 1990; Decided on 4.3.2002.
The property of which the suit accommodation is a part, was owned by late Khetsidas who inducted the defendant as a tenant. Khetsidas died issueless. However, he had adopted Prahlad Rai as a son. He had also executed a registered deed of Will bequeathing his property to Prahlad Rai. Prahlad Rai has two sons, namely, Prem Prakash and Paw an Kumar. Prahlad Rai and his two sons have constituted a partnership which is registered as firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash.
The firm claiming itself to be the owner of the suit premises filed suit for ejectment of the tenant-defendant. [Paras 2 & 3
Held : Clause (f) contemplates a claim for eviction being maintained by an owner-landlord and not a landlord merely. Though of course, we may hasten to add that the concept of ownership in a 1andlord-tenant litigation governed by rent control law has to be distinguished from the one in a title suit. ... What may suffice and hold good as proof of ownership in a landlord-tenant litigation probably mayor may not be enough to successfully sustain d claim for ownership in a title suit. (1981) 3 SCC 36 relied on.
The burden of proving ownership in a suit between landlord and tenant where the landlord-tenant relationship is either admitted or proved is not so heavy as in a title suit and lesser quantum of proof may suffice than what would be needed in a suit based on title against a person setting up a contending title while disputing the title of the plaintiff. 1988 JLJ 560 (SC) relied on. [Para 10
(2) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 12(1) (c) -- tenant‘s denial of title of landlord and/or disclaimer of tenancy -- is an act which is likely to affect adversely and substantially the interest of landlord -- in such case tenant incurs liability for eviction.
A tenant incurs liability for eviction if the tenant or any person residing with him has done any act which is likely to affect adversely and substantially the interest of the landlord therein. A tenant‘s denial of the landlord‘s title and/or disclaimer of tenancy has been held to be an act which is likely to affect adversely and substantially the interest of the landlord. In a series of decisions, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has consistently taken this view and we see no reason to make a departure therefrom. [Para 12
(3) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 12(1) (c) -- Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 116 -- Transfer of Property Act‘ 1882 -- S.111 (g) -- denial or disclaimer of title or tenancy – should Act the light of S. 116 of Evidence Act and S. 111(g) of T.P. Act.
It is significant to note that on the phraseology of section 116 of the Evidence Act, the rule of estoppel applies so long as the tenancy is not terminated and the rule estops the tenant from laying challenge to the ownership of the landlord at the commencement of the tenancy. But the rule of estoppel as incorporated in section 116 is not exhaustive and it may be extended or suitably modified in its application to other situations as well, retaining the basic feature of the rule. Clause (g) of section 111 of the Transfer of Property Act, insofar as relevant for our purpose, provides that a lease of immovable property determines by forfeiture in case the lessee renounces his character as such by setting up a title in a third person or by claiming title in himself. [Para 12
(4) Transfer of Property Act, 1882 -- S. 111 (g) -- provision as to tenancy being determined by forfeiture under -- rule is applicable even in area where T.P. Act is not applicable. AIR 1965 SC 1923 relied on.[Para 13
(5) Landlord and Tenant -- disclaimer of landlord‘s title -- is analogous to repudiation of contract -- it is implied condition of every lease that tenant is not to deny landlord‘s title which is inconsistent with existence of tenancy. Law of Landlord and Tenant by Evans & Smith 4th Edn. 89 relied on. [Para 14
(6) Landlord and Tenant -- lessee shall not do anything that may prejudice title of lessor -- if it is so done, lessor may re-enter for breach of this implied condition. Law of Landlord and Tenant by Hill & Redman, 17th Edn. P. 445 relied on. [Para 14
(7) Landlord and Tenant -- disclaimer by tenant -- characteristic of -- must amount to a renunciation by tenant of his character as tenant -- mere renunciation of tenancy without more cannot amount to a disclaimer. Foa‘s General Law of Landlord and Tenant, 8th Edn. p. 589 relied on. [Para 14
(8) Landlord and Tenant -- disclaimer -- must be renunciation by the party of his character of tenant by setting title in himself or in the third party. (1840) 1 Scott NR 36 relied on. [Para 15
(9) Landlord and Tenant -- disclaimer -- May be written or verbal -- it must amount to direct repudiation of the landlord-tenant relationship. 1 Cr M & R 137 and (1836) 1 M & W 695 relied on. [Para 15
(10) Evidence Act, 1872 -- S. 116 -- title of transferee -- can be challenged if not acknowledged -- the principle of estoppel applies after acknowledgement. (1988) 3 SCC 137, (1989) 4 SCC 732 and (1989) 1 SCC 552 relied on. [Para 16
(11) Landlord and Tenant -- denial of title bonafide on ground of seeking infonnation -- tenant not to be charged with disclaiming the landlord‘s title. AIR 1928 Cal. 312 confirmed. [Para 16
(12) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- S. 12(1) (c) -disclaimer of title -- liability of eviction when arises.
Denial of landlord‘s title or disclaimer of tenancy by tenant is an act which is likely to affect adversely and substantially the interest of the landlord and hence is a ground for eviction of tenant within the meaning of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 12 of M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961. To amount to such denial or disclaimer as would entail forfeiture of tenancy rights and incur the liability to be evicted, the tenant should have renounced his character as tenant and in clear and enequivocal terms set up title of the landlord in himself or in a third party. A tenant bona fide calling upon the landlord to prove his ownership or putting the landlord proof of his title so as to protect himself. ... cannot be said to have denied the title of landlord or disclaimed the tenancy. [Para 17
Nowhere in the written statement the defendant has disowned the character and nature of his possession over the suit premises as tenant. He has neither pleaded the title in the suit property in himself nor pleaded that anyone other than the plaintiffs is the owner of the property. On the contrary, in the written statement, as also in his deposition the defendant has admitted his having paid rent to the plaintiffs and having initiated proceedings before the Rent Controller for fixation of standard rent of the premises impleading the plaintiff-firm as the landlord-opposite party. Such a plea raised by the defendant in his written statement is not a malicious act of the tenant. The plaintiff staking a claim for eviction under section 12(1) (f) has also to prove ownership, apart from landlordship. [Para 18
(13) Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (M.P.) -- Ss. 12(1) (11), 18 and 12(1) (c) -- decree under S. 12(1) (c) set aside -- eviction decree maintained under S. 12(1) (11) subject to compliance of S. 18.
Decree for eviction of tenant under section 12(1) (c) of the Act is set aside. Instead the tenant is held liable to be evicted under section 12(1) (h) of the Act. Before passing the decree, the requirement of section 18 shall have to be fulfilled. The parties shall appear before the trial Court which shall ascertain from the tenant whether he elects to be placed in occupation of the accommodation from which he is to be evicted consistently with section 18 of the Act and to make consequential orders as contemplated therein. [Para 20
¼1½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 12 ¼1½ ¼p½ && csn[kyh okn && dsoy Lokeh&Hkw&Lokeh }kjk pyk;k tk ldrk gS && ,sls okn esa LokfeRo] gd ds fy, okn esa LokfeRo ls lqfHké gksrk gSA oknxzLr LFkku ftl laifÙk dk Hkkx gS] ;g LoxhZ; [ksrlhnkl ds LokfeRo es Fkh ftlus izfroknh dks vfHk/kkjh ds :i esa izfo"V fd;k FkkA [ksrlhnkj dh larkughu e`R;q gks xbZ Fkh rFkkfi] mlus izgykn jk; dks iq= ds :i esa nÙkd ys fy;k FkkA mlus izgykn jk; dks vius laifÙk dh olh;r djrs gq, foy dk jftLVªh—r foys[k Hkh fu"ikfnr fd;kA izgykn jk; ds nks iq= gSa] vFkkZr~ izseizdk‘k rFkk ioudqekj izgykn jk; rFkk mlds nks iq=ksa us Hkkxhnkjh QeZ xfBr dh gS tks QeZ izgykn jk; izseizdk‘k ds :i esa jftLVªh—r gSA oknxzLr ifjlj dk Lokeh gksus dk nkok djrs gq, QeZ }kjk vfHk/kkjh&izfroknh dh csn[kyh ds fy, okn Qkby fd;k x;kA ¿ iSjk 2 ,oa 3À vfHkfu/kkZfjr % [kaM ¼p½ esa csn[kyh ds fy, nkok Lokeh&Hkw&Lokeh }kjk pyk;k tkuk vuq/;kr gSa] dsoy Hkw&Lokeh }kjk ughaA ;|fi ge ;g Hkh rRijrk ls dgrs gSa fd HkkM+k fu;a=.k fof/k }kjk fofu;fer Hkw&Lokeh&vfHk/kkjh eqdnes es LokfeRo dh ladYiuk ls lqfHké gSA---- Hkw&Lokeh&vfHk/kkjh eqdnes esa tks LokfeRo ds lcwr ds :i esa i;kZIr gks rFkk ekU; gks] og gd ds fy, okn esa LokfeRo dk nkok lQyrkiwoZd iq"V djus ds fy, laHkkO;r% i;kZIr gks ldrk gS vFkok ugha HkhA ¼1981½ 3 ,l lh lh 36 voyafcrA Hkw&Lokeh vkSj vfHk/kkjh ds e/; ,sls okn esa tgk¡ Hkw&Lokeh&vfHk/kkjh laca/k Loh—r vFok lkfcr gks] LokfeRo lkfcr djus dk Hkkj mruk vf/kd Ukgha gS ftruk gd ds fy, okn esa gS] rFkk oknh ds gd dks fooknxzLr djrs gq, izfr}a}h gd [kM+k djus okys O;fDr ds fo#) gd ij vk/kkfjr okn esa vko‘;d lcwr dh ek=k ls de lcwr dh ek=k blds fy, i;kZIr gks ldrh gSA 1988 ts ,y ts 560 ¼mPpre U;k-½ voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 10À ¼2½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 12 ¼1½ ¼x½ && vfHk/kkjh }kjk Hkw&Lokeh ds gd dk izR;k[;ku rFkk vFkok vfHk/k`fr ls bUdkj && ,slk —R; gS ftlls Hkw&Lokeh dk fgr izfrdwyr% rFkk lkjr% izHkkfor gksus dh laHkkouk gS && ,sls ekeys esa vfHk/kkjh csn[kyh;ksX; gks tkrk gSA ;fn vfHk/kkjh vFkok mlds lkFk fuokl djus okys fdlh O;fDr us ,slk —R; fd;k gks ftlls Hkw&Lokeh dks mlesa fgr izfrdwyr% rFkk lkjr% izHkkfor gksrk gks] rc vfHk/kkjh csn[kyh;ksX; gks tkrk gSA vfHk/kkjh }kjk Hkw&Lokeh ds gd dk izR;k[;ku Fkk@vFkok vfHk/k`fr ls bUdkj ,slk —R; vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS ftlls Hkw&Lokeh dk fgr izfrdwyr% rFkk lkjr% izHkfor gkssus dh laHkkouk gSA fofu‘p;ksa dh ‘k`a[kyk esa e/; izns‘k mPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;g –f"Vdks.k fujarj viuk;k x;k gS rFkk gesa mlesa izR;arj djus dk dksbZ dkj.k fn[kkbZ ugha nsrkA ¿ iSjk 12À ¼3½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 12 ¼1½ ¼x½ && lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 116 && laifÙk varj.k vf/kfu;e] 1882 && /kkjk 111¼N½ && gd vFkok vfHk/k`fr dk izR;k[;ku vFkok mlls bUdkj && lk{; vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 116 rFkk laifÙk varj.k vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 111 ¼N½ ds izdk‘k esa gksuk pkfg,A bl ij /;ku nsuk egRoiw.kZ gS fd lk{; vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 116 dh ‘‘kCnkoyh ds vk/kkj ij] foca/k dk fu;e rc rd ykxw gksrk gS tc rd vfHk/k`fr lekIr ugha gksrh rFkk bl fu;e ls vfHk/kkjh] vfHk/k`fr ds vkajHk esa Hkw&Lokeh ds LokfeRo dks vkf{kIr djus ls focaf/kr gksrk gSA ijarq /kkjk 116 eas rFkk lfEefyr foca/k dk fu;r fu%‘ks"k ugha gS rFkk bl fu;e dh vk/kkjHkwr fof‘k"Vrk lqjf{kr j[krs gq, vU; ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa Hkh ykxw djus ds fy, bls foLr`r vFkok mi;qDrr% mikarfjr fd;k tk ldrk gSA tgk¡ rd gekjsa iz;kstukFkZ lqlaxr gS] laifÙk varj.k vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 111 ds [kaM ¼N½ esa micaf/kr gS fd ;fn iÍsnkj ijO;fDr dk gd [kM+k dj vFkok Lo;a dh gd dk nkok dj viuh vfHk/kkjh dh Hkwfedk dk R;kxz djrk gS rc LFkkoj laifÙk dk iÍk legj.k }kjk lekIr gks tkrk gSA ¿ iSjk 12À ¼4½ laifÙk varj.k vf/kfu;e] 1882 && /kkjk 111 ¼N½ && leigj.k }kjk vfHk/k`fr lekIr gksus dk mica/k && fu;r ml {ks= dks Hkh ykxw gksrk gS tgk¡ laifÙk varj.k vf/kfu;e ykxw ugha gksrkA , vkb vkj 1965 ,l lh 1923 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 13À ¼5½ Hkw&Lokeh rFkk vfHk/kkjh && Hkw&Lokeh ds gd ls bUdkj && lafonk ds fujkdj.k ds ln`‘k gS && izR;sd iÍs dh ;g foof{kr ‘krZ gS fd vfHk/kkjh Hkw&Lokeh ds gd dk izR;k[;ku ugha djsxk tks vfHk/k`fr ds vfLrRo ls vlaxr gSA bZokUl rFkk fLeFk —r ykW vkQ ySMykMZ ,aM VsauasaV prqFkZ laLdj.k i`"B 89 voayfcrA ¿ iSjk 14À ¼6½ Hkw&Lokeh rFkk vfHk/kkjh && iÍsnkj ,slk dqN ugha djsxk ftlls iÍknkrk dk gd izfrdwyr% izHkkfor gks && ,slk gks rc iÍknkrk bl foof{kr ‘krZ ds Hkax ds vk/kkj ij iqu% izfo"V gks ldrk gSA fgy rFkk jsMeSu —r ykW vkQ ySaMykMZ ,aM VsusaV lIrn‘k laLdj.k i`"B 445 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 15À ¼7½ Hkw&Lokeh rFkk vfHk/kkjh && vfHk/kkjh }kjk bUdkj && dk y{k.k && vfHk/kkjh }kjk vfHk/kkjh ds :i esa viuh Hkwfedk ds R;tu dh dksfV dk gksxk && mlls vf/kd dqN ugha gks rc dsoy vfHk/k`fr dk R;kx izR;k[;ku dh dksfV dk ugha gks ldrkA Qksvk —r tujy ykW vkQ ySaMykMZ ,aM VsusaV v"Ve laLdj.k i`"B 589 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 14À ¼8½ Hkw&Lokeh rFkk vfHk/kkjh && bUdkj && Lo;a dk vFkok ijO;fDr dk gd [kM+k dj i{kdkj }kjk viuh vfHk/kkjh dh Hkwfedk dk R;tu gksuk gksxkA ¼1840½ 1 LdkV ,u vkj 36 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 15À ¼9½ Hkw&Lokeh rFkk vfHk/kkjh && izR;k[;ku && fyf[kr vFkok ekSf[kd gks ldrk gS && Hkw&Lokeh&vfHk/kkjh laca/k esa lh/ks fujkdj.k dh dksfV dk gksuk gksxkA 1 lhvkj ,e ,aM vkj 137 rFkk ¼1836½ 1 ,e ,aM MCY;w 695 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 15À ¼10½ lk{; vf/kfu;e] 1872 && /kkjk 116 && varfjrh dk gd && vfHkLoh—r ugha gks rc vkf{kIr fd;k tk ldrk gS && foac/k dk fl)kar vfHkLoh—fr ds i‘pkr~ ykxw gksrk gSA ¼1988½ 3 ,l lh lh 137] ¼1989½ 4 ,l lh lh 732 rFkk ¼1989½ 1 ,l lh lh 552 voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 16À ¼11½ Hkw&Lokeh rFkk vfHk/kkjh && gd dk izR;k[;ku tkudkjh dh bZIlk ds vk/kkj ij ln~Hkkoiw.kZ && vfHk/kkjh ij Hkw&Lokeh ds gd ds bUdkj djus dk vkjksi ugha yxk;k tk,xkA , vkb vkj 1928 dy- 312 iq"VA ¿ iSjk 16À ¼12½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 12 ¼1½ ¼x½ && gd ls bUdkj && csn[kyh dk nkf;Ro dc mn~Hkwr gksrk gSA vfHk/kkjh }kjk Hkw&Lokeh ds gd dk izR;k[;ku vFkok vfHk/k`fr ls bUdkj ,slk —R; gS ftlls Hkw&Lokeh dk fgr izfrdwyr% rFkk lkjr% izHkkfor gksus dh laHkkouk gS] vr% ;g e-iz- LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 dh /kkjk 12 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼x½ ds vFkkZarxZr vfHk/kkjh dh csn[kyh ds fy, vk/kkj gSA ,sls izR;k[;ku ;k bUdkj dh dksfV esa vkus ds fy,] ftlds ifj.kkeLo:i vfHk/k`fr vf/kdkjksa dk leigj.k gks rFkk vfHk/kkjh csn[kyh;ksX; gks] vfHk/kkjh }kjk viuh vfHk/kkjh dh Hkwfedk dk R;tu gksuk pkfg, rFkk Li"V vkSj vlafnX/k ‘‘kCnksa esa Hkw&Lokeh dk gd Lo;a esa vFkok ijO;fDr esa miLFkkfir fd;k tkuk pkfg,A Hkw&Lokeh ls viuk LokfeRo lkfcr djus ds fy, ln~HkkoiwoZd dgus okys vFkok viuh laj{kk ds fy, Hkw&Lokeh ls mlds gd dk lcwr ek¡xus okys vfHk/kkjh---- ds ckjs esa ;g ugha dgk tk ldrk fd mlus Hkw&Lokeh ds gd dk izR;k[;ku fd;k vFkok vfHk/k`fr ls bUdkj fd;kA ¿ iSjk 17À fyf[kr dFku esa dgha Hkh vfHk/kkjh us oknxzLr ij vfHk/kkjh ds :i esa vius dCts dh gSfl;r rFkk iz—fr vu~&vaxh—r ugha dh gSA mlus oknxzLr laifÙk esa u vius gd dk vfHkokd~ fd;k gS] u ;g vfHkokd~ dh fd;k gS fd oknhx.k esa vfrfjDr vU; dksbZ laifÙk dk Lokeh gSA rRizfrdwy] fyf[kr dFku ds lkFk&gh vius vfHklk{; esa Hkh izfroknh us oknhx.k dks HkkM+k lanÙk djus rFkk oknh&QeZ dks Hkw&Lokeh&fojks/kh i{kdkj ds :i esa i{kdkj cukrs gq, ifjlj ds ekud HkkM+s ds fu;ru ds fy, HkkM+k fu;a=d ds le{k dk;Zokgh vkjaHk djus dh ckr Lohdkj dh gSA ------- izfroknh }kjk vius fyf[kr dFku esa fd;k x;k ,slk vfHkokd~ vfHk/kkjh dk fo}s"kiw.kZ —R; ugha gSA /kkjk 12¼1½¼p½ ds v/khu csn[kyh dk nkok djus okys oknh dks Hkw&LokfeRo ds vfrfjDr LokfeRo Hkh lkfcr djuk gksrk gSA ¿ iSjk 18À ¼13½ LFkku fu;a=.k vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼e-iz-½ && /kkjk 12 ¼1½ ¼t½] 18 rFkk 12¼1½¼x½ && /kkjk 12¼1½¼x½ ds v/khu fMØh vikLr && /kkjk 18 ds vuqikyu ds v/;/khu /kkjk 12¼1½ ¼t½ ds v/khu csn[kyh fMØh dk;e j[kh xbZA vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 12¼1½¼x½ ds v/khu vfHk/kkjh dh csn[kyh ds fy, fMØh vikLr dh tkrh gSA blds LFkku ij vfHk/kkjh vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 12¼1½¼t½ ds v/khu csn[kyh fd, tkus ;ksX; vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k tkrk gSA fMØh ikfjr djus ls iwoZ] /kkjk 1 dh mis{kk iw.kZ dh tkuk gksxhA i{kdkj fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k milatkr gksaxs ftlds }kjk vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 18 las lqlaxr :i ls vfHk/kkjh ls vfHkfuf‘pr fd;k tk,xk fd ftl LFkku ls mls csn[ky fd;k tkuk gS] og mldk vf/kHkksx izkIr djus dk jkLrk pquuk pkgrk gS vFkok ugha] rFkk mlesa vuq/;kr ikfj.kkfed vkns‘k fd, tk,¡xsA ¿ iSjk 20À
Lahoti, J. --1. The tenant is in appeal by special leave, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the first appellate Court, maintained by the High Court, directing the tenant to be evicted from the suit accommodation, which is a shop, on the ground available under clauses (c) and (h) of sub-section (1) of section 12 of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961, (hereinafter, the Act, for short).
2. The facts, relevant and not in dispute at this stage, are that the property of which the suit accommodation is a part, was owned by late Khetsidas who inducted the defendant as a tenant. Khetsidas died issueless. However, he had adopted Prahlad Rai as a son. He had also executed a registered deed of Will bequeathing his property to Prahlad Rai. Prahlad Rai has two sons, namely, Prem Prakash and Pawan Kumar. Prahl ad Rai and his two sons have constituted a partnership which is registered as firm Prahlad Rai Prem Prakash.
3. The firm claiming itself to be the owner of the suit premises filed suit for ejectment of the tenant-defendant on two grounds, firstly, that the accommodation was required bona fide by the plaintiffs for the purpose of continuing their own business, and secondly, that the accommodation was required bona fide by the plaintiffs for the purpose of rebuilding which could not be carried out without the accommodation being vacated. In the written statement, while contesting the claim of the plaintiffs for eviction, the defendant-tenant pleaded inter alia that the plaintiffs were not the owners of the suit premises and therefore, the tenant was not liable to be evicted though in that very written statement, at other places, the defendant admitted the plaintiffs as his landlords, also having paid rent to the plaintiffs after the death of Khetsidas, and also having initiated proceedings for fixing standard rent of the premises in which proceedings, the tenant had impleaded the plaintiff-firm as opposite party alleging the firm to be the landlord of the suit accommodation.
4. The trial Court framed several issues, arising from the pleadings of the parties, including an issue to the effect - whether the defendant tenant had denied the title of the landlord, and if so, to what effect. Having tried the issues, the trial Court found that the suit premises were in a dilapidated condition and needed re-construction for which purpose the plaintiffs were prepared to proceed and had requisite funds available with them, and therefore, the defendant was liable to be evicted so as to hand-over vacant possession over the suit premises to the plaintiffs and the plaintiffs were liable to complete the re-construction and hand-over possession to the defendant-tenant on completion thereof as required by the provisions of the Act. So far as disclaimer is concerned, the trial Court found that the defendant-tenant had admitted ownership of late Khetsidas but had only disputed the derivative title of the plaintiffs which the defendant-tenant could do without incurring the wrath of section 12(1) (c) of the Act. However, at the end, the trial Court held the plaintiffs not entitled to decree for eviction inasmuch as the landlord-tenant relationship between the plaintiff-firm and the tenant was not established. The suit was directed to be dismissed.
5. In an appeal preferred by the plaintiffs, the learned Additional District Judge did not agree with the trial Court so far as the ground of disclaimer is concerned and. held that the defendant's plea taken in the written statement furnished a ground for his eviction under section 12(1) (c) of the Act. The availability of ground under section 12(1) (h) and the finding of the trial Court in that regard was neither challenged in first appeal nor dislodged by the first appellate Court. In view of availability of ground under section 12(1) (c) of the Act, the first appellate Court directed the tenant to be evicted and the plaintiffs to be placed in vacant possession of the suit premises.
6. it ap
1. Dilbagrai Punjabi v. Sharad chandra = JT 1988(3) SC 308, 1988 JLJ 560
6. Majati Subbarao v. P. V.K Krishna Rao (deceased) by Lrs. = [JT 1989(3) SC 694]
7. Kundan Mal v. Gurudutta = [JT 1989(1) SC 147]
5. Tej Bhan Madan v. II Additional District Judge and others] = [JT 1988(2) SC 574]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.