AJAY KUMAR Vs. SHASHI KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff before the Trial Court is that, this appellant is in permissive possession of the suit schedule property and though he agreed to quit and vacate the suit schedule property, he did not vacate the same. Hence, he was forced to file a suit for permanent injunction and mandatory injunction. The contents of the plaint is that the schedule property comprised of a house bearing Door No.1-S-21-1583 which is shown as schedule 'B' property in the plaint. The defendant was residing in the schedule 'B' premises prior to the execution of sale deed in favour of this plaintiff by way of permissive occupant under his erstwhile owner. During execution of the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, the defendant had promised him that he would vacate and handover the schedule 'B' premises to the plaintiff within four months. Accordingly, the plaintiff had also permitted the defendant No.1 to reside in the schedule 'B' premises. As the defendant did not comply with the promise made by him, the plaintiff by revoking the permission which was granted earlier had asked the defendant to vacate the premises which is not been complied with by the defendant No.1 till the date of filing of this suit and though the plaintiff subsequently revoked the permission by issuing legal notice dtd. 20/1/2014. The defendant has continued to be in possession of the premises which amounts to un-authorized possession and further defendant has also un-authorizedly put up construction in the pavement/roadway abutting to the schedule 'A' premises.

(3.) In pursuance of the suit summons, the defendant appeared and filed the written statement that there was an agreement of sale in existence in his favour and also he questioned the title of the plaintiff. As the defendant had turned hostile towards the plaintiff, the plaintiff has approached this Court.