DEVU NARAYAN CHODANKAR Vs. SADASHIV KRISHNA MANDREKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff s Second Appeal.

(2.) Appellant had brought an action against the respondents for cancellation of a lease deed dated 16-6-65 executed by respondent No. 2 in favour of respondent No. 1. The suit and plaintiff s appeal against the decree have both been dismissed.

(3.) It was not in dispute that the premisses covered by the impugned lease deed had been originally leased out to the plaintiff/appellant by the deceased husband of respondent No. 2 under a document dated 1-9-1953. Plaintiff/appellant ran a tailoring shop in these premises up to 1962. In April 1962 he secured another tenement in the new market area and carried out his business there. Respondent No. 1 had been working with him for the last several years and when appellant shifted to the new shop, respondent No. 1 continued the tailoring business in the disputed premises. Disputes arose between the appellant and respondent No. 1 with respect to the right of occupation of the premises in question and the appellant instituted a suit against respondent No. 1 for eviction in 1964. In that suit appellant had pleaded that respondent No. 1 was in occupation of the shop only as his manager and was liable to vacate the same after termination of his services. In that suit respondent No. 1 had denied that the appellant was his master or that he was occupying the premises on his behalf. He pleaded that the appellant had ceded the tenancy in this respondent s favour and had left the premises for good. The Court in that suit upheld the defence plea and dismissed the suit. These facts were not in dispute before me.