MOHAN MESTHA Vs. JOHN SANTAN PINTO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent.

(2.) The appellant has filed a suit in OS No.23/2003 for the relief of permanent injunction and respondent herein has filed a suit for possession in OS No.75/2003. The case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court in OS No.23/2003 is that he is in possession in Sy.No.133/11. On the other hand it is the contention of the plaintiff in OS No.75/2003 that defendant is a tenant in respect of 'A' schedule property and he is paying rent of Rs.400.00 and arrears of rent also. The tenancy has been terminated and he is the owner of the property in Sy.No.133/14 and he is entitled for possession of suit schedule property.

(3.) The Trial Court having considered the pleadings of the parties has framed the issues whether the plaintiff is in exclusive possession in OS No.23/2003 and any interference by the defendant and similarly issues were framed in OS No.75/2003 as whether there is a tenant relationship and in arrears of rent and whether he is entitled for suit 'A' schedule property. The Trial Court considering both oral and documentary evidence on record, comes to the conclusion that the plaintiff in OS No.23/2003 i.e., appellant herein has not proved that he is in possession in Sy.No.133/11 and he is in possession of property in Sy.No.133/14 as claimed by the respondent. Hence, the suit in O.S.No.23/2003 was dismissed by the Trial Court and the appeal was filed against the decree passed in O.S.No.75/2003.