JAI ALIAS GANDHU Vs. UCHHABA SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANTS are the appellants before this Court against a reversing judgment. The plaintiff had filed Money Suit No.4 of 1983 and Money Suit No. 9 of 1984 for recovery of rent to the tune of Rs. 7,200/- from the defendants. Both the suits were dismissed by the learned Addl. Sub -Judge, Dhenkanal whereafter the plaintiff preferred two Money Appeals. While Money Appeal No. 3 of 1990 arises out of judgment and decree passed in Money Suit No. 4 of 1983, Money appeal No. 4 of 1990 was filed against the judgment and decree passed in Money Suit No. 9 of 1984. The lower appellate Court allowed Money Appeal No. 3 of 1990 and dismissed the Money appeal No. 4 of 1990. Against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court, this appeal has been filed.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff is that he is owner of the premises consisting of big and small rooms with asbestos roof situated on plot No. 2282/5765 in village Khadag Prasad and had let out the said premises to late Jayakrushna Sahu as a tenant for the purpose of running a huller machine in the month of February, 1980. It is also alleged that late J. K. Sahu paid the arrear rent and executed a rent deed (Chuktinama) in support of the tenancy and in the said Chuktinama late J. K. Sahu agreed to pay rent to the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 300/ - per month from January, 1980. Since rent was not paid as agreed to, both the suits were filed, one in 1983 and the other in 1984 claiming recovery of Rs. 7,200/ -. The defendants 1 to 4 are the legal heirs of late J. K. Sahu and contested the suit by filing a written statement. The said defendants denied the execution of the Chuktinama as claimed between the plaintiff and late J. K. Sahu and also took an alternative defence that the Chuktinama was an unregistered document and was inadmissible in evidence for want of registration. Their further case is that the suit land originally belonged to the plaintiff and the land was lying fallow. Late J. K. Sahu who was a close friend of the plaintiff requested him to part with the said land towards the southern side abutting National Highway 42 for the purpose of installing a huller machine and the plaintiff orally sold the premises to late J. K. Sahu for a consideration of Rs. 80/ - in the month of October, 1965 and delivered possession thereafter. The late J. K. Sahu had came into possession and constructed some rooms and obtained the licence for operating a huller machine and also executed an agreement with Orissa State Electricity Board for electric connection. The defendants alternate plea is that they have perfected title over the suit land as well as the rooms standing thereon by way of adverse possession.

(3.) SO far as Money Suit No. 9 of 1984 is concerned, rent was claimed from March 1981 to February, 1982 and the same is not permissible in view of Order, 2, Rule 2 C.P.C. and, therefore, Money Suit No. 9 of 1984 is not maintainable in law.