GEORGE MITRAN Vs. GERFRUDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A suit for recovery of a building with the land appurtenant thereto on the strength of title was decreed by the Trial Court but the decision was reversed in appeal and the suit was dismissed. Second Appeal is by the plaintiff.

(2.) Sathyarthi, uncle of the appellant, was the owner. Along with his wife Judith he bequeathed the property to the appellant and his mother under Ext. Al. After the death of Sathyarthi, claiming to be the full owner as heir of her husband, Judith sold the property to the first defendant under Ext.B2 oh 19-1-1964. She died in December 1965 or January 1966. Appellant was entitled to possession only from that date on the strength of his title under Ext. Al because Judith had the right to enjoy till her death.

(3.) Claiming under Ext.Al and alleging first defendant to be a lessee under Judith, the appellant sued her in O.S.451 of 1967 not for possession but for rent alone. Title and lease were denied and first defendant claimed full right and possession under Ext.B2. Thereafter also the suit was converted into one for declaration of title and realisation of compensation for use and occupation alone and not for recovery. Thereafter the suit was dismissed by the Trial Court and appellate court accepting the title of Judith and the first defendant. But the decision was reversed by this Court in 1979 in Second Appeal and the suit decreed.