K. GOVINDA SHERIGARA Vs. SHARADA KAMATH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's second appeal calling in question judgment and decree passed by Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Karkala, dated 20-9-2014 passed in R.A. No. 32 of 2012 where under the judgment and decree passed by Principal Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karkala, dated 31-5-2012 in O.S. No. 188 of 2002 came to be decreed and directed the defendant to hand over vacant possession of suit schedule premises within three months and granted decree for mesne profits by directing defendant to pay plaintiffs Rs. 2,000/- per month from the date of suit till date of handing over possession by way of damages.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Sriyuths Dr. S. Arumugham, learned Counsel appearing for appellant and Chandranath Ariga K., learned Counsel appearing for respondents.

(3.) It is the contention of Sri Arumugham, learned Counsel for appellant that there is no relationship of landlord and tenant and issues framed in this regard by the Trial Court is erroneous and so also the finding recorded thereon. Learned Counsel for appellant would fairly submit that though ground has not been urged in the appeal memorandum with regard to maintainability of the suit namely that plaintiff ought to have filed the suit as a small causes suit before the jurisdictional Court and as such the present suit filed before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karkala was not maintainable and as such the present appeal be admitted by framing substantial questions of law and same be answered in favour of appellant.