DHARMESWAR BARMAN Vs. DIPJYOTI SARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 22. 08. 2003, passed, in Title Appeal No. 68 of 1997, by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No. 2, Guwahati, dismissing the appeal and upholding the judgment and decree, dated 26. 09. 1997, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 3, Guwahati, in Title Suit No. 16 of 1988, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff-opposite party.

(2.) THE case of the plaintiff may, in brief, be described thus : The plaintiffs has an Assam type house, situated within the municipal area, and, on being approached by the defendant No. 1, the plaintiff let out the house to the defendant, as a monthly tenant, for a fixed period of six months, because of the fact that the defendant required the house to live, while constructing his own residential house on a piece of land, which is situated at a distance of about one kilometer from the plaintiff's suit property. Believing in the assurances given by the defendant, the plaintiffs let out the suit house to the defendant on a monthly rent of Rs. 30/- and the tenancy commenced on 01. 12. 1980. The defendant paid one month's rent in advance; but thereafter, paid nothing towards the rent despite demands raised by the plaintiff. The defendant has, thus, committed breach of the agreement, which he had with the plaintiff, he (defendant) has become a defaulter and that he (defendant) has also altered the tenanted premises. The defendant is, therefore, liable to be evicted from the suit premises. The plaintiff accordingly sought for a decree for recovery of possession of the suit property by evicting the defendant therefrom, arrear rents, etc.

(3.) THE defendant resisted the suit, by filing written statement, his case being that plaintiff's brother, Prabhat Sharma, a co-pattadar of the land, had entered into an oral contract, in the year 1971, with the defendant for sale of the suit land and, having taken a sum of Rs. 5,000/ as advance, Prabhat Sharma had handed over the possession of the land to the defendant No. 1 and the defendant No. 1 accordingly constructed a house thereon. Thereafter, though the defendant, on several occasions, requested the said Prabhat Sharma to receive the balance amount of money and execute the sale deed, the said Prabhat Sharma has failed to execute the sale deed. The plaintiff was never a landlord of the defendant nor did the defendant pay to the plaintiff any rent, in advance, as has been claimed by the plaintiff.