SURAJ DIN Vs. PARMANAND SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a plaintiffs' second appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent and damages. The trial court decreed the suit, but on appeal by the defendants the suit was dismissed by the lower appellate court.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are these : One Shital Prasad was admittedly the owner of the disputed house. Parmanand Singh was its tenant. THE plaintiff appellants claiming to be the sous of the sister of Shital Prasad instituted the present suit no. 417 of 1972 on 4-11-1972 for the ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent etc. against Parmanand Singh. THE allegations in the plaint were that Shital Prasad their maternal uncle had determined the tenancy of Parmanand by means of a notice dated 26-6-1972. Shital Prasad, however, died according to the plaintiffs on 6-7-1972 whereupon the plaintiff appellants sent another notice dated 26-9-1972 determining the tenancy of Parmanand Singh. Parmanand having failed to vacate the house, the present suit was brought for the reliefs mentioned above. After the institution of the suit, Parmanand is stated to have vacated the house and handed over possession to Harakh alias Ram Harakh on 7-1-1972. Accordingly, he was also impleaded as a defendant in the suit. Consequential amendments were made in the plaint. During the pendency of the suit Harakh died and his legal representatives were brought on the record.

(3.) ON appeal by the defendants (other than Parmanand Singh), the lower appellate court reversed the decree of the trial court and the findings on which the same was based and dismissed the suit. Three questions were formulated by the lower appellate court for its decision. These were :