NARAIN JEWELLERS Vs. COL SOHAN SINGH & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rfa No. 712/2018 and C.M. Nos. 34692/2018 (stay) & 38210/2018 (for dismissal of appeal)

(2.) The only issue to be examined is as to whether the subject suit filed by the three plaintiffs, who are only three of the co-owners of the suit property was maintainable, and in the absence of consent of one co-owner, being the respondent no.4/defendant no.2, and who was the co-owner to the extent of 1/8th share in the suit property, and noting that this is the only issue involved, at the time when the notice was issued in this appeal on 28.08.2018 when the following order was passed:-

(3.) The aforesaid order crystallizes the issue which is required to be decided as to whether the subject suit for possession could have been filed on behalf of only three plaintiffs/three coowners to the extent of 3/4th co-ownership interest in the suit property and where there did not exist the consent of one of the co-owners to the extent of 1/8th share of the property, being respondent no.4/ defendant no.2/Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, by also further noting that even the Notice of Termination of tenancy dated 07.07.1992 issued to the appellant/defendant no. 1/tenant was not on behalf of all the coowners but was only on behalf of the three respondent nos.1 to 3/plaintiffs/co-owners. In the order dated 28.08.2018, this Court has referred to the judgment passed by this Court on 17.07.2018 in the case of Navin Chander Anand v. Union Bank of India and Ors. in . Since the judgment is a short judgment of seven paras, the same is reproduced as under:-