KATHAL SAB Vs. PONNAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is by defendant No. 1. By the impugned judgment the first Appellate Court has affirmed the judgment of the Trial Court directing the appellant and his two brothers (defendant Nos. 2 and 3) to vacate and to deliver vacant possession of the suit premises (shop premises) measuring 11 ft. x 16.5 ft. to the plaintiffs. Concurrent findings by both the Courts. The claim for possession was based on termination of the lease.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (plaintiffs) and perused the judgments of the two Courts below.

(3.) ONLY the appellant herein carried the matter further to the first Appellate Court. The first Appellate Court, on reconsideration of the matter, affirmed the aforesaid judgment and decree of the Trial Court. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is in exclusive possession of the suit premises.