JUDGMENT

1. The present first appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17th June 2016, passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar in Special Civil Suit No. 403 of 2011, by which the plaintiff's suit was allowed.

1.1 By the impugned judgment and decree, the learned trial Court passed following order:

(i) declared the defendant's possession over the suit property as illegal and invalid;

(ii) directed the defendant to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property to the plaintiff within two months from the date of the order;

(iii) issued a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from transferring, assigning, or creating any charge or obtaining any rent in respect of the suit property; and

(iv) directed the defendant to pay Rs. 5,000/- per month as mesne profits from January 2008 till the date of recovery of possession.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, parties are referred to as per their original status before the learned trial Court.

3. Facts of the case are as under:-

3.1 The suit property is House No. 53, Motera, owned by the plaintiff.

3.2 The plaintiff initially shifted to the suit property upon receiving the possession letter and share certificate from the society. Subsequently, the plaintiff shifted to another place in Bapunagar for personal reasons. The defendant is a near relative of the plaintiff. The defendant was working in Torrent Electricity Company and was about to superannuate in the year 2005. Thus, he was in search of residential premises. Upon the defendant's request, and out of good relationship, the plaintiff gave the suit property to the defendant for a period of two years, with the condition that the defendant would vacate the property whenever he obtained another residential property. There was no agreement between the parties to charge any rent.

3.3 The parties thereupon entered into an agreement on 26th May 2005, by which the defendant was permitted to reside in the suit property for a period of two years. The agreement remained in force for two years only. Even after the expiry of the two year period, the defendant did not vacate the suit property. On the contrary, the defendant filed a suit against the plaintiff, being Regular Civil Suit No. 293 of 2008 before the learned 7th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar, seeking an order of non-eviction without due process of law. The court in that suit, while not deciding in the defendant's favour on the merits, passed an order that the defendant may not be evicted without following the due course of law. In those circumstances, the plaintiff filed the present suit to recover vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property along with mesne profits.

3.4 The defendant on being served filed his written statement at Exhibit 14. He admitted that he is residing in the suit property since the year 2005. He denied almost all other facts pleaded by the plaintiff. The defendant contended that no agreement was executed between the parties on 26th December 2005 or at any point of time or any document if produced as such does not contain the valid and legal signature of the defendant. The defendant pleaded that he is an illiterate person, and that his signature, if any, was obtained by the plaintiff by exercising undue influence and coercion over him.

3.5 Specifically, in his oral deposition, the defendant contended that his signature on the agreement was obtained by the plaintiff under the threat that the plaintiff would commit suicide if the defendant refused to sign the document. The defendant contended that such a document does not constitute a valid and effective agreement between the parties.

3.6 The defendant claimed that he is a lawful tenant of the suit property at a monthly rent of Rs.1500/-. He contended that the plaintiff has been receiving rent month after month but has not issued any rent receipts. The defendant further contended that the plaintiff had agreed to sell the su