SHAIKH RASOOL Vs. HAMIDA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The appellants were defendants. The respondent had filed a suit for possession based upon the title. Simultaneously, the plaintiff had come with a case that defendants Nos.1 to 3 had unauthorizedly sublet the suit premises to defendants Nos.4 and they were recovering the rent for which the plaintiff was entitled. The pleadings of the plaintiff reveal that he was treating the respondent as a tenant. Defendant had come with a case that sale transaction was nominal and never intended to be acted upon. Therefore, there was no landlord tenant relationship. They were in possession as a owner.

(3.) The defence of the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 was that it was a nominal document which was discarded by the First Appellate Court and it reversed the findings of the trial Court.