SANTOKH SINGH THRU LRS Vs. SUCHA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present regular second appeal has been pending for the last nine years. The appellant is present in person.

(2.) HE has prayed for an adjournment on the ground that his counsel is not available. The request for adjournment is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) MY attention has been drawn by the learned counsel for the respondent to the fact that he had filed a suit for possession in respect of the suit property which happens to be a residential property bearing No. 1/210/3 -A, Haji Mohd. Ishaq Building, Sadar Bazar, Delhi Cantt. The case which was set up was that the respondent had purchased the suit property as an evacuee property from the Ministry of Rehabilitation and he came into possession of a portion of the property in the year 1948 while as a portion of the suit property was under the occupation of the present appellant. It was alleged that the appellant being in unauthorized occupation of the suit property deserves to be evicted. The appellant filed his written statement and took the plea that he is the tenant of the custodian in respect of the suit property and in that capacity he becomes the tenant under the respondent also. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: