IDEA MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS LTD. Vs. KAMLESH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the appellants, it transpires that this second appeal is against the concurrent judgments and findings of the Civil Judge as well as Additional District Judge asking the appellant to vacate the premises along with the payment of arrears of rent and mesne profits.

(2.) THE backdrop facts between the parties are that five years term lease was granted to the "Escotel Company" (which is later renamed "Idea Company") by the landlady for installing the mobile tower. It was extendable for next five years. So, this extension was availed by the lessee. After the expiry of 10 years, the landlady terminated the tenancy of the lessee by serving appropriate notice of one month. The lessee did not vacate the premises and continued to occupy the same along with his tower and paraphernalia for next five years and even further. So, she was impelled to institute the suit against the Escotel Company and the suit was decreed. The first appeal preferred by the Company failed. So, here this is the second appeal.

(3.) THE basic alleged substantial questions of law, which have been drafted in the second appeal, are quite unsustainable. The Trial Court has decided the appeal in accordance with the provisions of Order 41, Rule 31 C.P.C. Additional issues under Order 41, Rule 31 C.P.C., were framed by the learned Additional District Judge were in the compliance of the order of the High Court dated 06.05.2013.