BHAGWAN SARUP NAGAR Vs. RAM KISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing the appeal filed by the respondent. The appeal was filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the CPC). Appellant as plaintiff has filed a suit for mandatory injunction with a prayer that the defendant-respondent be directed to ensure possession to him of the demised premises description of which was given in the plaint. He also claimed Rs. 3,900/- towards mesne profit for use and occupation of the property by the respondent. It was the case of the plaintiff that he was the owner of the house and the defendant was his cousin and he had inducted him as a licensee in two rooms. Thereafter, when the defendants started misbehaving, he issued a notice to him on 27.9.1991 revoking his licence. Since he failed to vacate the portion of the house in dispute, mesne profit was claimed and the occupation of the demised property was also claimed. The defendant took the plea that the property was exclusively in continuous peaceful possession of the defendant for last more than 50 years as its owners without paying rent to anybody including the plaintiff. It was also denied that he was ever inducted as a licencee. Five issues were framed by the trial court. It is to be noted that replication was filed by the plaintiff. After considering the evidence brought on record it was held that the plaintiff was the owner of the property in dispute but all the issues were decided against him. The issues were as follows :

(3.) The finding of the trial court was reversed by the First appellate court and the suit filed by the plaintiff was decreed. When the second appeal was admitted, the following question was formulated :