V S VAMANA SHETTY Vs. DINAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are directed against the judgments and decrees of this Court in S. A. 482 of 1960 and S. A. 939 of 1960 (1965 KLT. 473) after obtaining leave.

(2.) TO appreciate the points raised before us it is necessary to state some facts. The appeals arise out of O. S. 122 of 1957 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Cochin for arrears of rent in respect of a building site and in the alternative for compensation for use and occupation. The site belonged to the Hindu joint family of the plaintiffs. The first plaintiff's wife Leelavathi constructed the building thereon and she was in possession of the same until it was purchased in execution of a decree by purushothama Shetty, who it is admitted got delivery of the same. Moorthi Rao, father of the defendant, purchased in 1931 the building from Purushothama shetty.

(3.) BUT the learned Subordinate Judge in appeal found that the defendant is liable for compensation for use and occupation at the rate of rs. 40/- per annum and deducting the proportionate amount payable on the 1/24th share in the site belonging to the first plaintiff which had passed on to the defendant by virtue of the partition decree and court purchase decreed the suit for the balance. The plaintiffs as well as the defendant filed second appeals against the decision of the Subordinate Judge. The learned single judge agreeing with the trial court dismissed the suit. The appeals are directed against the decision of the single judge.