SMT. LALMANI DEVI AND OTHERS Vs. SMT. AMRAVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard argument of learned counsels for the parties and perused the records.

(2.) Original Suit No. 3/2004, Smt. Amravati Vs. Smt. Lalmani Devi & Others , was filed with averment that earlier owner of disputed house was Hajari Ram, after whose death his son Dwarika Sav became its owner. After death of Dwarika Sav, his wife (plaintiff) became owner of disputed house. Defendants have no concern with disputed house nor are they its tenant. They are trespasser in disputed portion of first floor of this house, and are in its occupation in unauthorised manner. In spite of notice of plaintiff, defendants had not vacated the disputed premises, so plaintiff had filed suit for their eviction.

(3.) In written statement, defendants denied the plaint averments and pleaded that their status in disputed house is that of tenant. They submitted that earlier owner of house was Hajari Ram, who had inducted Nem Chandra Bhandari in this house as tenant. After death of Nem Chandra Bhandari, his son Rajkumar Bhandari became tenant of said premises. Defendant no.-1 Lalmani Devi was earlier married to Shanker, and from that marriage one daughter defendant no.-3 was born. Later on, defendant's marriage with Shanker was annulled through mediation (Panchayat) and then she had married with Rajkumar Bhandari. Thus, after death of her husband Rajkumar Bhandari, defendants came in tenancy of first floor of house in question. They have deposited the rent of house in court. Plaintiff's suit is based on incorrect facts and liable to be dismissed.