VINEY KUMAR MAHAJAN Vs. VISHAMBHARI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT has filed the present appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21.05.2010 whereby the suit filed by the respondent for possession against the appellant was decreed without trial and the appellant was directed to vacate the suit premises and hand over the possession thereof to the respondent within three months of the decree.

(2.) CLAIM of the respondent in the suit was that late Budh Singh Rawat, husband of the appellant was working as Peon/Care Taker since 1947 with the predecessor of the respondent and he remained in service till 24.02.1989 (till his death). During his employment, Budh Singh Rawat was given the accommodation in question without charging any amount either towards rent or other wise and since the master servant relationship snapped due to death of Budh Singh Rawat, his legal heirs were liable to return possession of the premises in question. Appellant took the defence that late Budh Singh Rawat was a tenant under the predecessor in interest of the respondent and that initially Rs.75/ -per month towards rent was being deducted from the salary paid to her husband which were increased to Rs.100/ -per month and thereafter to Rs.125/ -per month.

(3.) THE learned Single Judged has opined that no triable issue arises and has decreed the suit on the reasoning that the appellant had not denied that her husband was an employee under the predecessor in interest of the respondent and that the registers Ex.P -1 to Ex.P -32 wherein signatures of husband of the appellant were admitted against entries pertaining to monthly salary paid evidenced his receiving fully salary and thus the plea that each month rent was deducted when salary was paid was disproved.