LAWS(GAU)-2013-3-117

SHRAWAN KUMAR SHARMA AND ORS. Vs. SANWARMAL MODI

Decided On March 05, 2013
Shrawan Kumar Sharma And Ors. Appellant
V/S
SANWARMAL MODI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners as owner landlord of the premises comprising of the southern pF of the pucca RCC house having several rooms fully equipped with doors, windows and other fittings and fixtures including electrical fittings together with a similarly constructed front verandah along with one C.I. sheet roofed two-chambered sanitary latrine, one tube well, a part of the vacant back land over which the defendant illegally constructed a C.I. sheet roof house and the land on which the aforesaid houses and structures stand measures 78 ft x 4 inches in length and 32 ft x 6 inches in breadth, being part of the land of Dag No. 5466 covered by periodic patta No. 476 situated at Sukhanpukhuri of Tinsukia town (first part) and included in Municipal Holding No. 1151 of Ward No. 5 of Tinsukia Municipality and bounded as:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_117_LAWS(GAU)3_2013_1.html</FRM>

(2.) The reliefs as indicated above have been sought for on the following pleaded facts:

(3.) The facts pleaded by the defendant in his written statement was that though the rent was settled monthly, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs used to collect rent at an irregular interval and at his own convenience whereof the defendant has disputed the factum of paying the rent strictly in the first week of succeeding month. The facts further pleaded was that Subhkaran Sarma died on 23.6.1994 and after the death of Shubhkaran Sarma, his son plaintiff No. 1 used to collect the rent and the same was paid to him as and when demanded. Thereafter, the landlord did not turn up to collect the rent from Jan. 1995 and only on 25.9.1996, the plaintiff No. 1 came to Tinsukia and demanded an exorbitant rent and refused to accept the rent fixed on the basis of settlement dated 10.12.1989 (Ext. I). The plaintiff not only refused to accept the rent tendered by the defendant at the existing rate, but also directed the defendant to vacate the suit premises immediately. Consequently thereupon the rents were deposited in the court.