PISHTA BAI JAIN Vs. VONOD SOLANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 8-3-1997 passed by Shri I.S. Uboweja, Ilnd Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon in Civil Appeal No. 20-A/95, reversing the judgment and decree dated 27-7-1995 passed by Shri A.K. Verma, 1st Civil Judge Class-II, Rajnandgaon in Civil Suit No. 3-A/93, whereby the suit for eviction was decreed, the Appellant/Plaintiff has preferred this second appeal.

(2.) BRIEF facts are that the Appellant/Plaintiff instituted Civil Suit No. 3-A/93 for eviction of the tenant Respondent/Defendant herein on the ground that she had purchased the suit house from Devkibai by a registered sale-deed dated 10-4-1992. Vide notice. Ex. P-7 dated 20-4-1992, the Appellant/Plaintiff had informed the Respondent/Defendant herein about purchasing the suit house from Devkibai and asked the Respondent/Defendant to pay the rent of the suit house henceforth to the Appellant/Plaintiff. Eviction was sought on the ground of non-payment of rent despite service of notice dated 20-4-1992 and on the ground of need for reconstruction under Section 12(1)(h) of the Chhattisgarh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (henceforth 'the Act').

(3.) THE learned Lower Court decreed the suit for eviction and arrears of rent in favour of the Appellant/Plaintiff on the ground of Section 12(1)(a) of the Act as also on the ground that the Defendant/tenant had denied the title of the landlord, while denying relief under Section 12(1)(f) of the Act on the ground that the suit was premature under Section 12(4) of the Act, A finding was recorded that since the Defendant did not challenge the sale-deed dated 10-4-1992 in the written statement, the fact of execution of sale-deed by Devkibai in favour of the Appellant/Plaintiff was an admitted fact and, therefore, non-production of the original sale deed dated 10-4-1992 by the Appellant/Plaintiff had no adverse consequence on the merits of the suit. It also held that since the Defendant did not dispute the receipt of notice, Ex. P-7 sent by the Plaintiff after purchase of the suit house regarding attainment of tenancy and did not reply thereof, it was proved that the Defendant was the tenant of the Plaintiff in the suit house. While decreeing the suit on the ground of Section 12(1)(a) of the Act, the Court, while placing reliance on Majati Subbarao v. P.V.K. Krishna Rao (Deceased) By L.Rs. : AIR 1989 SC 2187, also decreed the suit for eviction on the ground of denial of title of the landlord by the tenant.