HAMIDA Vs. MOHAMMAD KAHLIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal is by the legal representatives of the plaintiff in title suit No. 13/84 filed for eviction of the defendant from the suit premises. The plaintiff filed the said suit stating that the suit premises was let out to the defendant as a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 125/- in the year 1972; the defendant failed to pay the rent from October, 1983; he required the suit premises reasonably and in good faith for accommodation of large number of members of his family; he has six sons, two of whom were unemployed youth and has also a grown-up unmarried daughter besides his nephew who was also unemployed. He wanted to open a shop in the outer room of suit premises just to engage his sons and nephew in the business and that he had no house in that town. The defendant had filed a suit for specific performance in respect of the same property.

(3.) The trial Court dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff for eviction and decreed the suit of the defendant filed for specific performance. The plaintiff filed appeals against judgments and decrees passed in both the suits. The first appellate Court reversed them. In other words, decreed the suit of the plaintiff filed for eviction and dismissed the suit filed by the defendant for specific performance. Aggrieved by the same the defendant filed second appeals before the High Court. The High Court confirmed the judgment of the first appellate Court dismissing the suit filed by the defendant for specific performance; however, allowed the second appeal from appellate decree No. 113/91 (R), in effect, dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff for seeking eviction of the defendant. Hence this appeal.