RAJENDRA Vs. SOU. SUJATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal arises out of Judgment and Order dt.4.9.2013 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Wardha in Regular Civil Appeal No.150 of 2009, which was dismissed. The First Appeal arose from the decree passed in Special Civil Suit No.6 of 2005 on 21.7.2009 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Wardha whereby the decree for possession of the suit house was granted and the trial Court directed the defendant to hand over possession of the suit house to the plaintiff and also ordered enquiry into mesne profit under Order 20, Rule 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are as under :

(3.) The defendant resisted the suit contending that there was a joint hindu family consisting of the husband of plaintiff, the defendant and other two brothers, while their elder brother Arvind resided separately after his marriage. Other brothers were staying together. According to the defendant, husband of plaintiff was karta of the family and the defendant used to contribute income to the family. Thus, according to the defendant, out of the joint family income, the suit house was acquired. The issue arose before the learned trial Judge as to whether the suit house belonged to the plaintiff and whether the defendant resided therein on the basis of license and as to whether the suit house or plot were constructed/purchased out of joint hindu family income as contended by the defendant. The trial Court found that the suit house is owned by the plaintiff, while the defendant was residing because the plaintiff permitted him to reside temporarily and gratuitously. The trial Court also found that the suit property was not acquired by the joint hindu family as contended by the defendants. Thus, on the basis of evidence led before the trial Court and also after examination of judicial precedents cited before the trial Court, the learned trial Judge was pleased to pass decree in favour of the plaintiff by a reasoned judgment.