NARAYAN VITHOBAJI PACHBHAIYEE Vs. UMAKANT MAHADEO PACHBHAIYEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY invoking jurisdiction of this Court under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, the original plaintiff has filed this second appeal being aggrieved by judgment, dated 31st March, 1990, passed by learned additional District Judge in Regular Civil Appeal No. 357 of 1985, whereby the appeal came to be allowed and judgment and decree passed by trial Court on 31st July, 1985, directing the respondents (defendants) to deliver the possession of the suit house has been set aside. Brief facts required to be stated are as under:-

(2.) AT the outset, the genealogy of the parties, which is not disputed, can be described as under:-<img>C:\program Files\regentdatatech\image\pr1.jpg</img>

(3.) THE plaintiff filed suit for possession on the basis of the title acquired to the suit house, situated on Plot No. 130, Nazul Sheet No. 14/b, Ward No. 30 at Achalpur, on the contention that the suit house is the self-acquired property of deceased Vithoba. The plaintiff further contended that at the time of partition, dated 27th May, 1938, the suit house was divided into two shares and one share was allotted to Ramchander and the other share was allotted to plaintiff Vithoba. It is contended that the portion of the suit house, which was allotted in the share of plaintiff, was allowed to be used by defendant No. 1 Mahadev as a licensee since 1972. It is contended that the defendant No. 1 mahadev was called upon to vacate the suit house after revocation of the licence, but in vain. It is contended that defendant No. 1 constructed bathroom on the portion of the house without permission and the possession of the defendants is unlawful. It is contended that the defendants refused to vacate the house and, therefore, the plaintiff filed suit for possession of the same.