VILAS V AFZULPURKAR Vs. P GANGAIAH NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Court on 12. 3. 1999 made the following order.

(2.) SRI Vilas V. Afzulpurkar, learned senior counsel representing appellants, would maintain that both the court of first instance and also the appellate court totally erred in appreciating the respective stands taken by the parties. When the very right and title of the plaintiff had been denied, the burden is on the plaintiff to establish the same. The learned senior counsel also had drawn the attention of this Court to Exs. B-1, B-2 and B-3 as well and would maintain that in the light of the same the stand taken by the plaintiff cannot be a sustainable stand. Further, the learned senior counsel would contend that the appellate court totally erred in relying upon the definition of 'landlord' within the meaning of Rent Control Act since the same cannot be made applicable. At any rate, in the light of the specific stand taken in Ex. B-1 by the father of the plaintiff the suit itself cannot be maintained and when that being so, in the light of the findings which had been recorded by the appellate court, this is a fit matter where an order of remand to be made. Learned counsel also had taken this court through the relevant documents and the findings recorded by both the court of first instance and also appellate court.

(3.) PER contra, Sri P. Gangaiah Naidu, learned senior counsel representing respondent-plaintiff would maintain that concurrent findings had been recorded by both the court of first instance and also appellate court. The learned counsel also had taken this court through the relevant findings and further explained what was the nature of relief, which had been prayed for by the father of the plaintiff in Ex. B-1 and also further had drawn the attention of this court to Ex. A-10 apart from Exs. A-1, A1-A, A-2. The learned counsel also had drawn the attention of this Court to Exs. A-3, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8 and A-9 as well and would maintain that there had been some confusion, but the same can be clarified, especially, in relation to Ex. B-1 in the light of the nature of the relief which had been prayed in Ex. B-1 and the averments made in the said plaint.