SAGHIR AHMAD Vs. HAR PRASAD DUBEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) G. S. N. Tripathi, J. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of the judg ment and decree dated 17-2-84 passed by the then 1st Addl. District Judge, Allahabad in Civil Appeal No. 170/79 - Smt. Habibun Nisha and others v. Har Prasad Dubey, whereby the learned 1st Addl. District Judge dismissed the ap peal with costs. That appeal arose out of suit No. 275/71, in which the judg ment and decree was delivered by Munsif West, Allahabad on 19-2-79. The suit of the plaintiff had been decree in toto. The defendant felt aggrieved, filed the said appeal, which met this fate as noted above.

(2.) THE plaintiff Har Prasad Dubey filed suit No. 275/71 in the Court of Munsif West, Allahabad for a decree of ejectment of the defendants from the portion of plot No. 126/188, Mutthi Ganj, Allahabad measuring with a frontage 43. 8 inches towards Tilak Road, bounded with North portion of plot No. 188, Mutthi Ganj, Allahabad South plot of Sri Radhey Shyam, East por tion of plot No. 188, Mutthi Ganj, Allahabad and West Tilak 'road. He also claimed Rs. 215. 96 on account of rent, damages, cost of notice etc. Pendente lite and future damages @ Rs. 70 was also claimed.

(3.) UPON the pleadings of the parties, the learned Munsif framed the fol lowing issues: , (1) Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable as alleged in written statement? (2) Whether the suit has not been properly valued and court-fee paid is insufficient? (3) Whether the court has no jurisdiction to try the suit? (4) Whether the land or construction was let out either way its effect? (5) Whether the plaintiff ever permitted the defendant to raise construction? (6) Whether the suit is defective on account of partial ejectment as alleged in the written statement ? (7) Whether the notice is defective and illegal. If so, its effect? (8) Whether the suit is barred by principle of estoppel? (9) Relief?