MADDULA DAMODARA GUPTA Vs. SISTLA GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These civil miscellaneous appeals are preferred against a common order passed in two appeals, A.S. 43 and 44 of 1969, Sub-Court, Vijayawada allowing the appeals and remanding the twosuits out of which the appeals arose, for disposal according to law in the light of the observations made in the judgment. The order of remand was passed in the following circumstances:

(2.) The appellant in these two appeals filed two suits, O.S.81/68 and 425/68 in the District Munsif's Court, Vijayawada. The first suit was filed against one Gopalkrishnamurthy for an injunction restraining Mm from leasing out the suit house which is a shop. His case was that the plaintiff was a tenant from the year 1942 and the defendant was the owner. As the defendant wanted to effect some repairs and Improvements to the entire building, of which the plaint schedule premises form part, he requested the plaintiff to vacate the building in 1961 and agreed to re-deliver the building on completion of the repairs. The plalntiff agreed to do so. Instead of restoring possession to the plaintiff, the defendert was trying ?o lease out the premises to a third party. The plaintiff therefore, filed the suit for an injunction restraining the defendant from leasing out the suit building to any othsr person other than the plaintiff The plaintiff also filed O.S. 425/68 as in the meanwhile the defenders in the previous su't had leased it out to one Mancrama Farcy centre. He added Manorama Fancy centre as the second defendant in the suit and prayed for restoration of possession of the plaint schedule building practically on the same allegations as in O S No. 81 of 68.

(3.) The plaintiff vaiued OS. 425/68 for the purpose of court-fee and for jurisdiction as one filing under Sec. 40 (d) of the Court fees act and paid a court fee on the amount of rent payable for one year. One of the issues that was framed was issue 5 :