AQUEEL @ AQUEEL AHMAD Vs. MAHESH CHAND BANSAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Shamimul Hussain, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ravi Anand Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) This second appeal under Section 100 C.P.C. has been filed by the defendant-appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 02.09.2019 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Hapur in Civil Appeal No. 61 of 2018 (Aqueel @ Aqueel Ahmad vs. Mahesh Chand Bansal) whereby the learned Additional District Judge has affirmed the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2018 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) IInd, Hapur in Original Suit No. 411 of 2014, (Mahesh Chand Bansal vs. Aqueel @ Aqueel Ahmad).

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is not in dispute that plaintiff is the landlord of the suit property, however, the issue which is in dispute is that the defendant is not a tenant but a servant of the actual tenant and therefore, no effective decree of eviction/compensation could have been granted against a servant of a tenant in absence of tenant being impleaded as a party to the suit.