BOCHHRAJ FACTORIES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. DAMYANTI DAMODAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two Revision applications arise out of a suit filed by the plaintiff in the Bombay City Civil Court. Revision Applicant in C.R.A. 69 of 1976 is original defendant No. 2 who is admittedly the landlord of the premises. The Revision applicant in C.R.A. No. 86 of 1976 is original defendant No. 1 and who calls himself today as the tenant of the suit premises and against whom the plaintiff has a substantial grievance of pleading fraud etc. Defendant No. 2 alone raised the question of jurisdiction of the Civil Court and the preliminary issue was tired on that point. The trial Court held that the Civil Court had jurisdiction to try the suit. Being aggrieved the two defendants have filed the two separate Revision Applications. Since they arise out of the same proceedings and involve the same point they are heard together and will be disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The facts that must be noted in the controversy between the parties are these : One Mavji Waghji was admittedly the tenant of a godown belonging to defendant No. 2. He had been a tenant for about 25 years during his life time. This Mavji had two sons Damodar and Laxmidas. Damodar, the elder son is alleged to be a person not of sound mind. Laxmidas had strained relationship with the deceased and was staying away from him during his life time. The plaintiff is the daughter-in-law of the deceased Mavji and wife of the elder son Damodar. Damodar died on 1-3-1964.

(3.) The plaintiff alleges that Mavji left will. Under that whiles is the sole legatee of the entire property including the tenancy rights of Mavji in relation to godown in dispute. As the legal representative and sole legatee under the will she alone represent the entire estate of Mavji and is entitled to succeed to the tenancy rights with regard to the godown.