BENI MADHAVPRASAD Vs. RASKLAL AMBALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit, out of which this appeal arises, was instituted by the present appellant's father Ramratanlal in the Court of Civil Judge, First Class, Mhow, against the respondents for the recovery of possession of house No. 1963 situated in Bhoi Mohalla, Mhow, and of a room in an adjacent house bearing No. 1012 and for mesne profits.

(2.) THE plaintiff Ramratanlal claimed that the property belonged to a joint Hindu family of which he was the Karta; that his father Ramkrishan had permitted his munim Chunnilal, the father of the defendant-respondents Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6 to live in house No. 1963 with his family free of rent; that after the death of chunnilal, his widow and other members of his family were also allowed to occupy the house; that Chunnilal, who used to look after the management of houses belonging to the joint family, got one of the rooms in the adjoining house No. 1012, which had been rented out, vacated from the tenant for his own use and occupation, that Chunnilal and his family continued to use the room and were still in possession of it; that in 1939 when the plaintiff asked the defendants to execute a document evidencing the ownership of the plaintiff over the house and the room in question, the defendants first consented to do so but later on evaded the issue; and that when subsequently a registered notice was given to the defendants asking them to vacate the house and the room, the defendants for the first time intimated to the plaintiff that house No. 1963 had been gifted by Ramkishan to chunnilal. On these allegations the plaintiff sued for the recovery of the possession of the property in suit.

(3.) THE defendants admitted that the two houses first belonged to the plaintiff's joint family and that Chunnilal and his family had been allowed by Ramkishan to occupy house No. 1963 free of rent. It was also admitted by them that Chunnilal got a room in house No. 1012 vacated from a tenant for his own use and occupation. Their main defence was that on 15-9-1921 the plaintiffs father ramkishan made a gift of house No. 1963 to Chunnilal for "long and faithful" services rendered by 'chunnilal to Ramkishan, and that since then Chunnilal was in possession of the house as owner and after his death they were the owners of the house and as such in possession of it. In regard to the room in house No. 1012, the defendants averred that it was in adverse possession of Chunnilal and after his death in their possession for over twenty-five years.