VIJAY SINGH Vs. MUNNI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) POONAM Srivastava, J. Heard Sri R. B. Singhal learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiff/appellant and Sri K. Ajit, learned Counsel appearing for the defendant/respondents.

(2.) THE second appeal was entertained by this Court. Notices were issued to the defendant/respondents. Execution and operation of the judgment and order, and dispossession of the appellant was stayed by this Court vide order dated 9-1-2006. Sri K. Ajit, Advocate, preferred an application on 24-1-2006 for recalling interim order dated 9-1-2006 for the reason that he filed a caveat on 20-12-2005. Notice was sent to the appellant by registered post on the same day. Acknowledgment has not been received back till date. Second appeal was filed in the Registry without giving any notice to him and interim order was passed behind his back on 9-1-2006. THE application came up alongwith record of second appeal on 28- 1-2006. On 27-4-2006, office was directed to summon the trial Court record by the next date fixed, which was 10-5-2006. As agreed between the Counsels for the parties, second appeal was listed for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. Several dates were fixed and final argument was heard by both the Counsel for the parties on 5-9-2006. After the arguments, judgment was reserved. Second appeal was listed for further arguments on 9-5-2007. During the intervening period the sole appellant died when the appeal was listed for 'further arguments' on 9-5-2007, a substitution application was filed for substituting the heirs of sole appellant. Application was allowed and the heirs were allowed to be brought on record on 17-5-2007. Further arguments of the respective Counsels were heard.

(3.) THE defendant claimed to have constructed the four shops and according to the terms and conditions of rent note, the plaintiff continued to pay taxes. It was for this reason, his name continued to be recorded in the record of Nagar Palika. THE defendant No. 1 executed sale-deed on 4-1-1990 in favour of the defendant Nos. 2 and 3 and put them in possession. Separate written statements were filed by the defendant Nos. 2 and 3 disputing each and every assertion of the plaint. THE house in question was newly constructed and shops were constructed by the defendant No. 1 in the year 1986. Chabutara in front of the house was demolished and four shops were completed in the year 1988. THE shops were let out to the tenants and the rent was realized by the defendant No. 1. Munni Devi, she let out the house in question to the plaintiff Vijai Singh at a monthly rent of Rs. 225/ -. Subsequently, the plaintiff failed to tender rent to the defendant Nos. 1 and 2. In the circumstances, cause of action arose, J. S. C. C. Suit No. 6 of 1990 for eviction and arrears of rent was instituted. THE defendants are bona fide purchaser and suit has been instituted by the plaintiff on false allegation, therefore, it is liable to be dismissed with cost. THE trial Court framed as many as ten issues. THE trial Court dismissed the suit of the appellant. THE judgment was challenged in civil appeal No. 2 of 1999 before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Mainpuri, which was dismissed vide judgment and order dated 17-11-2005.