SHAILJA DWIVEDI Vs. FIRM KIRITKUMAR CHUNNILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellants have challenged legality & propriety of the judgment & decree dated 2-3-95 passed by the 1st Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Appeal No. 10-A/87 affirming the judgment & decree dated 10-2-87 passed by the Civil Judge Class-I, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No. 49-A/76, whereby the Civil Judge Class-I has dismissed the civil suit for eviction filed by the appellants against the respondent. Second appeal has been admitted for consideration on the following substantial question of law:--

(2.) As per plaint allegation, the plaintiffs/appellants No. 2 & 3 along with their father Dwarika Prasad were owners and landlords of the suit accommodation situate at Sadar Bazaar, Bilaspur. The suit accommodation was given to the respondent on rent for non-residential purpose. Partition took place between the members of the joint family and the tenanted accommodation had fallen into the share of Vinod Kumar, appellant No. 2 herein, who was not having any suitable alternate accommodation in Bilaspur for his business. Therefore, suit for eviction was filed. By filing written statement, the respondent has admitted tenancy but has denied the pleading especially relating to partition and bona fide need.

(3.) After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, suit was dismissed and compensative cost of Rs. 2,000/- has been imposed upon the appellants, same was challenged before the appellate Court. During the pendency of appeal, application for further amendment in pleading was filed by both the parties and same has been allowed by the appellate Court. Additional issues were framed, opportunity of additional evidence was given to the parties and thereafter, the appeal was dismissed.