SANJAY SHARMA Vs. MOHAN JUTE MILLS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and decree dated 12-4-2004 passed by IV Additional District Judge, (FTC), Raigarh in Civil Suit No. 4-A/2002 wherein the said court granted a decree of eviction and compensation in favour of the respondent/landlord and against the appellants/possessors of the suit premise allotted to one Bajranglal Sharma who is ancestor of the appellants, situated at Raigarh as mentioned in the schedule of plaint.

(2.) Admittedly, suit premise was allotted to Bajranglal Sharma who was an employee of Raigarh Jute Mill. Later on Raigarh Jute Mill transferred the property to the respondent. The said Bajranglal Sharma died on 22-10-1999 during his employment and the appellants were residing in the said premise as members of his family. As per respondent, they granted six months' time to the appellants to vacate the premise, but they did not vacate, that is why suit was filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that late Bajranglal Sharma was not the licencee of the said premise, but he was tenant @ Rs.60/- per month and after his death, appellants are occupying the said premise as tenant @ Rs. 90/- per month. Further case of the appellants is that the resplendent namely Pawan Kumar Agrawal is not entitled to bring the present suit and as respondent is not owner of the suit accommodation, a decree cannot be passed in his favour. It is further case of the appellants that employment benefits arising out of death of late Bajranglal Shama are not paid to them and the appellants No.4 and 5 are minors, therefore, decree passed by the trial Court is not sustainable.