POONAMBHAI S RATHOD Vs. SAVJIBHAI RANCHHODBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of present appeal, the appellants have challenged the legality and validity of the impugned judgment and decree dated 28th September 1984 passed by the City Civil Judge, Ahmedabad, in Civil Suit No.1577 of 1979, whereby the trial Court has partly allowed the suit filed by the respondent-original plaintiff and directed the appellant-original defendant to deliver the peaceful and vacant possession of the portion of the suit land admeasuring 2 sq.mtrs. or 5 sq.yds., which is a part of Survey No.465/4/1 and also a part of Final Plot No.90 of T.P. Scheme No.11 and further directed to pay mesne profit of Rs.5/- per month from the date of institution of the suit till possession of the suit land is handed over.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the appellant is the original defendant in the suit instituted by the respondent-original plaintiff being Civil Suit No.1577 of 1979 in the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, to recover the possession of the suit land as well as mesne profit mainly on the ground that the respondent-original defendant unlawfully took possession of 10 sq.yds. of land out of the land bearing Survey No.465/4/1. THE said suit ultimately came to be decreed partly by the trial Court vide aforesaid impugned judgment and decree directing the appellant-original defendant herein to hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the suit land after removal of the hut as indicated in the operative part of the impugned judgment and decree to the respondent-original plaintiff. Hence, present appeal.

(3.) IN view of aforesaid, I am of the opinion that the trial Court has assigned cogent and convincing reasons for arriving at the impugned conclusion. Over and above the aforesaid reasons, I adopt the reasons assigned by the trial Court and do not find any illegality much less any perversity in the findings recorded. I am in complete agreement with the findings recorded by the trial Court. No case is made out to interfere with the findings recorded by the trial Court. Hence, present appeal deserves to be dismissed.