SUNIL SHARMA AND ANR. Vs. SMT. UMA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed against the concurrent judgments of the Courts below; of the trial Court dated 6.8.2011 and the first appellate Court dated 21.7.2012; by which the suit of the respondent/plaintiff has been decreed for possession and mesne profits against the appellant with respect to suit property bearing No. 1 -B, Block -E, measuring 110 sq yds part of khasra No. 466, 467 and 468 situated in the abadi of Jawahar Park, Shakarpur Ext, Village Mandawali Fazalpur, Shahdara, Delhi now known as E -1/B, Jawahar Park, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi -92 shown in red in site plan Ex. PW 1/1. The respondent/plaintiff is the step -mother i.e. the appellant No. 1/defendant No. 1 is the step -son. On account of deterioration of their relations, respondent/plaintiff terminated the gratuitous licence of the appellants/defendants in the suit premises by means of the legal notice dated 18.8.2008, Ex. PW 1/7, but since the appellant/defendant failed to vacate the suit property, the subject suit for possession came to be filed.

(2.) BEFORE me, counsel for the appellant has argued the following aspects: -

(3.) SO far as the issue of pecuniary jurisdiction and the form of suit is concerned, I do not think in cases such as the present the same would result in a substantial question of law being raised and which is sine qua non for a second appeal under Section 100 CPC. In any case, even if the arguments are considered on merits the same are meritless and cannot be accepted. A reading of the judgment of the trial court with respect to the issue of pecuniary jurisdiction, and which has been dealt with in issue no. 4, shows that onus of this issue was on the appellants/defendants and since there was nothing except the oral statements of the appellants/defendants on the value of the property it was held that this issue no. 4 has to be decided in favour of the respondent/plaintiff. Relevant observations of the trial court, in this regard, are contained in para 11 of the judgment and which reads as under: -