ABDULRAHEMAN ISMAILJABUWALA Vs. YUSUFBHAI MALANGBHAI LAKIWALA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is one such case where the following observations made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Shreenath and another v. Rajesh and others, 1998 AIR(SC) 1827 would aptly apply:

(2.) THIS appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is filed by the third party obstructionist who moved two different applications Exh. 14 and 36 in the rent execution application No. 58 of 2005 which was filed by the decree holder for execution of the judgment and decree of recovery of possession of the suit premises.

(3.) AS could be seen from the record of the case, respondent No.1 to 3 herein - original plaintiffs [herein after referred to as "the landlords"] filed rent suit No.332 of 1981 against respondent No. 4 herein praying for recovery of the the possession of the suit premises mainly on the ground that the respondent No.4 who was holding the property as tenant, after death of his father, made material alteration of permanent nature in the suit premises and committed breach of tenancy and made himself liable to vacate the suit premises. Said suit came to be dismissed by the learned Small Cause Court, Vadodara by judgment and decree dated 24.9.1985.