LAWS(ALL)-1998-1-85

RAM AUTAR GOEL Vs. JAGANNATH GUPTA AND ANOTHER

Decided On January 29, 1998
RAM AUTAR GOEL Appellant
V/S
JAGANNATH GUPTA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act is directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.4.86 recorded by the Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Kanpur Nagar, in S.C.C. Suit No. 25 of 1985. The matter was once heard by me and was disposed of by my order dated 7.7.97 whereby the revisional application was dismissed.

(2.) The aggrieved revisionist went up in Civil Appeal No. 7329 of 1997 arising out of an S.L.P. (C) No. 18906 of 1997 to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The leave as prayed for was granted. The matter was heard and it was remanded back to this Court with an observation that the real dispute which survived in the revision was whether decree for possession as passed by the trial court on the ground of denial of title of the landlord by the present revisionist was legally justified or not and the Honlile Supreme Court was further of the view that this question, unfortunately, was not examined by the High Court on merits.

(3.) The plaintiff-respondents sued for possession of the suit premises on two grounds, (I) default in payment of rent and (2) denial of the title of the plaintiffs by the tenant. While deciding the issues, the trial judge had found that the default was there, but on a further Issue he had also found that the tenant was entitled to the protection under Section 20 (4) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Thus, the eviction was not permissible on the ground of default. This Court in its earlier judgment had overlooked the decision on Issue No. 4 giving the protection to the tenant under Section 20 (4) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and although the controversy concerning denial of title was raised before it and case-laws were placed on that point, this Court under a mistaken idea, that the decree was on two grounds, declined to record any opinion on this second ground.