DHARMENDRA YADAV Vs. GIRISH KUMAR SAHNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Manish Goyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Nikhil Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri H.N Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) This second appeal has been filed by defendant-appellant Dharmendra Yadav against the judgement and decree dated 21.09.2019 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Allahabad in Civil Appeal No. 109 of 2018 arising out from Original Suit no. 1095 of 2011 between both the parties by which the learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Allahabad has partly reversed the impugned judgement of the learned trial court in Original Suit No. 1095 of 2011 passed on 20.09.2018 by which Civil Judge (SD), Allahabad and has decreed the suit in toto.

(3.) From the perusal of the record attached with this second appeal, it appears that the civil suit no. 1095 of 2011 was filed by the respondent Girish Kumar Sahini (plaintiff in the suit) against the appellant Dharmendra Yadav (defendant in the suit) for mandatory injunction in respect of disputed shop no. 3, Bahuguna Market, Allahabad, alleging that the plaintiff purchased the said disputed shop on 27.03.2003 from Allahabad Development Authority by a registered sale deed. On or around 01.05.2003, the defendant gave a proposal for purchasing the disputed shop on payment of Rs. 4,50,000/- and also promised to get the sale deed executed within 6 months after paying the sale amount. Relationship between the parties was cordial and the defendant requested the plaintiff to give him the disputed shop on licence. Because of cordial relationship and on the assurance of defendant, he gave the shop to the defendant on his request on licence. The defendant, however, neither made the payment of sale amount to the plaintiff nor he took any step for execution of the sale deed. Realizing the dishonest intention of the defendant, in December 2006, the plaintiff refused to sell the said shop to him and asked him to vacate the shop and demanded Rs. 4,500/- monthly as damages. Defendants' brother Rakesh Yadav had purchased the shop no. 4 of Bahuguna Market and the defendant without any permission of the plaintiff demolished the intervening wall existed between shop no. 3 and 4 and converted the same into one shop. The plaintiff gave notice to defendant on 02.09.2011 revoking the licence and asking the possession of the said disputed shop with a monthly damage at the rate of Rs. 4,500/-. The defendant did not deliver back the possession of the shop nor paid the damage. Hence, the suit was filed by the plaintiff.