SMT. SUDARSHAN TIWARI Vs. SHEO PRASAD TIWARI TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Based on an earlier compromise decree passed in Civil Suit No 3-A/1952, petitioners filed a title suit for possession and mense profits in respect of House No. 850 Lordgunj Ward Jabalpur, from respondent No.2(i) to(iv) on the allegations that in 1996 respondents No. 1(a) to (e) after receiving heavy premium, illegally inducted respondents 2 (i) to (iv) to house No. 850 and permitted them to reconstruct or make additions or alteration in the suit house to carry on business in the name and style of M/s. Roopali Collections without payment of rent. Thus, according to petitioners they are entitled to get back possession of House No. 850 and mense profits from respondent No. 2(i) to (iv).

(2.) Respondents No. 1(a) to (e) in their written statement accepted the compromise decree and that the respondent No.,1 is Public Trust but denied that petitioners are entitled to get back possession of House No. 850.

(3.) Respondent No. 2(i) to (iv) in their written statement denied the relief claimed in the suit. They also denied that the trial Court has pecuniary jurisdiction to try the suit. Subsequently, they set up a counter-claim against the plaintiffs as well as other respondents by filing an application under Order VI Rule 17. Trial Court vide order 29.7.2009 rejected the counter claim. This order of the trial Court was challenged in W.P.No. 9172/2010. On 26.8.2010, W.P. was withdrawn with liberty to move fresh application in the trial Court to set-up counter-claim only against the plaintiffs.