ABDUL WAHAB SAB Vs. T V SATYAPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE this matter was heard a year back and directed to post for dictating judgment, learned counsel for the parties are heard afresh and I proceed to dictate the judgment.

(2.) THE facts that gave rise to this appeal are, respondent/plaintiff is the landlord and appellants/defendants are tenants. The parties are referred to as per their rank in the trial Court.

(3.) THE plaintiff terminated the tenancy of the defendants by issuing notice and calling upon them to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises. Since the defendants failed to comply with the same, the plaintiff filed the suit for ejectment. The defendants resisted the suit by filing objections admitting the jural relationship but denying service of notice. The trial Court framed issues and the suit went for trial. The plaintiff got examined himself as PW-1 and marked documents. He was also cross-examined. Despite granting sufficient opportunity, defendants did not examine any witness and failed to adduce evidence. On the basis of the material brought on record, the trial Court decreed the suit granting 60 days time to the defendants to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the suit schedule premises. It also ordered for enquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 CPC regarding mesne profits. Being aggrieved by the same the present appeal is filed.