MEHATHA SILK CENTRE Vs. SAMPATHRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appeals are concerned with the shop No. B-23, Mohan Building, A. M. Lane, chickpet, Bangalore. The appellants are M/s Mehta Siik Centre, represented by the second defendant Surajmal, claimed to be in occupation of the premises. One Mohanlal when he was alive was a person who entered into an arrangement between him and aforesaid Mehta Silk centre for the purpose of occupation of the shop by the latter. While Mohanlal, after his death his L. Rs. , would call the arrangement as a licence, Mehta Silk Centre, calls this arrangement as a lease,

(2.) FEARING forcible eviction by Mohanlal and sons, Mehta Silk Centre came forward with the suit for recovery in O. S. 1615 /74, out of which R. A. 639/80 has arisen relating to R. S. A. 334/97, An injunction against the disturbance of their possession was granted by the trial Court, but negatived by the Appellate Court on appeal and therefore they are here before this Court in the above R. S. A. 334/97.

(3.) MOHANLAL when he was alive filed a suit for possession against the aforesaid Mehta Silk Centre in O. S. 1883/74, out of which R. A. 640/80 has arisen resulting in RSA 335/97. The eviction was denied by the Trial Court, but ordered by the Appellate Court on appeal by the plaintiffs and therefore Mehta Silk Centre, the defendant in that case, are before this Court in this second appeal.