Disputed questions of title cannot be decided by the Small Causes Court.

Court No. - 38

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 12129 of 2022

Petitioner :- Dilip Kumar Singh And Another

Respondent :- Nirmala Devi And 5 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Prem Narayan Rai,Shariq Shamim,Sr. Advocate

Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.

A supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner is taken on

record.

The present petition has been filed challenging the judgment

and decree dated 8.7.2013 passed by the Small Causes Court,

District Allahabad decreeing SCC Case No. 51 of 2006

instituted by respondent no. 1 for arrears of rent and eviction of

respondent no. 2 from the suit property as well as against the

judgment and order dated 15.11.2022 passed by the Additional

District Judge, Court No.02, District Allahabad rejecting Civil

Revision No. 03 of 2013 filed against the decree of the trial

court.

A reading of the judgments of the courts below indicates that

respondent no. 2, the alleged tenant in the suit property, had

denied the title of respondent no. 1 and had alleged that one

Kishori Lal was the owner and landlord of the suit property by

virtue of a Will dated 2.1.1992 executed by the husband of

respondent no. 1, i.e., the erstwhile owner / landlord of the suit

property. The Will dated 2.1.1992 was not produced before the

courts below.

The petitioners who claim themselves to be the sons of Kishori

Lal have filed the present petition. The petitioners were not

party in the courts below.

I do not find any illegality in the findings recorded by the courts

below. The Will was never produced before the courts below

and, in any case, disputed question of the title between

respondent no. 1 and the petitioners was not to be decided by

the Small Causes Court. The courts below have recorded a

finding that respondent no. 1 had proved that she along with her

sons and daughters was the owner and landlord of the suit

property.

The findings recorded by the courts below are findings of fact

based on evidence on record. There is no perversity in the

aforesaid findings so as to occasion interference by this Court

under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

The petition is dismissed.

Order Date :- 4.1.2023/Satyam

Digitally signed by :-

SATYAM AGRAHARI

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad