GIAN CHAND GUPTA THROUGH LRS. Vs. COIR BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court, and by which judgment the trial Court dismissed the suit for possession and mesne profits filed on behalf of the appellant/landlord.

(2.) It was not disputed before the trial Court and also before me that the respondent is a tenant, the rate of rent is Rs.4,675/- per month and that a notice dated 27.11.2006 was served under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 terminating the tenancy of the respondent No.1. What is very emphatically and passionately argued is that the appellant is not the owner of the premises and therefore the trial Court rightly dismissed the suit.

(3.) The case of the appellant/plaintiff before the trial Court was that the rights in the premises were purchased by the appellant/plaintiff (who died during the pendency of the suit and was substituted by his legal heir Sh. Sudhir Kumar Gupta) under an agreement to sell dated 22.7.2003 and whereafter the defendant No.1/respondent No.1/tenant attorned in favour of the appellant/plaintiff. After attornment since 2003 right till the tenancy was terminated by a notice dated 27.11.2006, rent was paid by the respondent no.1 to the plaintiff.