KAMAL KUMAR Vs. IMARTIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the defendant/tenant, against whom a decree for ejectment is passed by two Courts below.

(2.) THIS appeal is admitted by this Court by order dated 17/1/2001 on following substantial questions of law :

(3.) SHRI R.A. Roman, learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently argued that in absence of cross-objection on behalf of the respondents it was not open for the Court to pass a decree on the ground of Section 12(1)(e). The appellate Court has come to the conclusion that the ground under Section 12(1)(a) is not available and has dismissed the suit on that ground. His submission, therefore, was that in absence of cross-objection the Court should not have passed the decree in favour of the plaintiffs. He submitted that the Ist appellate Court has erroneously invoked the provisions of Order XLI Rule 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in granting the decree in favour of the plaintiffs without there being any cross objection.