GURUDAYAL ARORA Vs. URMILA GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal under Sec. 100 of Civil Procedure Code (for brevity, CPC) arises out of judgment and decree dtd. 14/10/2022 passed by 8 t h District Judge, District Gwalior in RCA No. 120/2021 arising out of judgment and decree dtd. 30/09/2021 passed in Civil Suit No. 7000541-A/2016 by 2 n d Civil Judge, Junior Division, District Gwalior.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are that a house bearing No. 45/557 situated at Lohiya Bazar, Lashkar, District Gwalior belongs to the respondents /plaintiffs, out of which, on 19/11/1977 one shop was given on rental basis to the appellant /defendant at the rent of Rs.400.00 per month. In the said house, two shops are situated out of which, in one shop respondent/plaintiff No. 2 is doing business and the shop shown in the plaint map by red lines is occupied by the appellant /defendant as a tenant (for brevity, 'disputed shop'). The rent of the disputed shop is outstanding against the appellant /defendant @ Rs.400.00per month from October, 2013. The plaintiff No. 4 is working in the shop of plaintiff No. 3 at Bhopal. The plaintiff No. 4 namely Bhupendra Gupta is bonafidely needed the disputed shop for opening a shop of Chemicals and Steel materials and for this purpose, the plaintiff has no other alternative shop in the Gwalior District. Apart from the said two shops, the rest part of the said house is residential and water pipe line of the washroom constructed on the first floor over the disputed shop goes into the government drainage chamber. At the time of construction of disputed shop, drainage of water of the disputed shop has been shown in the map by green points as 1, 2, 3 and 4 indicating construction of four chambers. However, in order to cause harm and loss to the plaintiffs, the defendant by applying tiles over the said four chambers had closed them. The defendant put clothes and other materials in the pipe lines of the said chambers, due to which, bad smell comes out and the moisture gets logged on the wall and when the plaintiff opposed for the same, the defendant started quarreling with the plaintiffs.

(3.) The defendant had given assurance to vacate the disputed shop by May, 2016, therefore, even after issuance of notice, the plaintiffs have not filed the suit. The plaintiff No. 2 Rajendra Gupta and his wife told the defendant to vacate the disputed shop, on which, the defendant used obscene words against them and refused to vacate the disputed shop. The disputed shop is situated in the business area of Lohiya Bazar, Gwalior, therefore, the plaintiffs would earn atleast Rs.8,000.00 per month from the disputed shop. On the basis of aforesaid, prayed to handover the peaceful vacant possession of the disputed shop to the plaintiffs from the defendant, recovery of outstanding rent amount of Rs.14,400.00 and till the disputed shop is vacated interim rent amount of Rs.8,000.00 per month may kindly be granted to the plaintiffs.