GANESH PRASAD Vs. BADRI PRASAD BHOLANATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal arises out of the suit for ejectment. The plaintiff Gaya prasad filed the present suit with the allegations that he was a partner of the Firm M/s. Badri Prasad Bholanath defendant No. 1. The others were arrayed as defendants Nos. 2 to 7. The business was being carried on in premises No. 3 Baluwa Ghat, Allahabad. The plaintiff had given the disputed premises on licence to the partnership of which he himself was a member and the licence was revoked by registered notice dated 18-4-1970. The defendants, however, were occupying the disputed property illegally and were liable to be ejected.

(2.) One written statement was filed by the defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3. It was mentioned in para 12 of the written statement that Dwarika Prasad father of defendant No. 3 was the tenant of the disputed property and the business was being carried on by the plaintiff as a partner with the consent of Dwarika Prasad and defendant No. 3. It was alleged that the suit was liable to be dismissed as it was filed against the plaintiff himself as a partner.

(3.) The appeal came up to this court earlier when it was decided by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gopinath. He decreed the suit for ejectment of the defendants. The matter was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court by the defendants. The Supreme Court remanded the case to the 1st Appellate Court holding that the appeal was to be decided afresh in the light of the observations made by it. The Supreme Court, however, made it clear that the disputed property will be deemed to be an accommodation within the meaning of the U.P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act and the title of the plaintiff could not be challenged by the defendants. The Supreme Court further held as under:-