MIRA PRAVA PAUL Vs. ABDUR RAHIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/plaintiff and Mr. Sheeladitya, learned counsel for the respondents/defendants.

(2.) The present petitioner as the plaintiff instituted T.S. No. 19/2002 in the court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) No. 2 Kamrup (M), Guwahati for ejectment of the present respondents from the suit land and for recovery of arrear of rent. The claim of the plaintiff/ petitioner is that she is the owner and possessor of the plot of land measuring 1 Katha 10 Lechas of Dag No. 214 of KP Patta No. 33 situated at Matgharia, Narengi under Beltola Mouza in the District of Kamrup (Metro), Assam. On 1.3.2001 as per written agreement the plaintiff/ petitioner rented out a Tinchali room measuring 12 ft X 18 feet to the respondent/ defendant No. 1 at monthly rent of Rs. 150/- but on the following month when the plaintiff /petitioner demanded monthly rent, the defendant/ respondent No. 1 refused to pay the rent and in August 2001, the defendant/ respondent No. 1 Abdul Rahman, disappeared from the room leaving aside his wife and children who also refused to pay any rent to the petitioner/plaintiff. When the defendant/ respondent No. 2, the wife of the defendant/ respondent No.1 collected building materials, the plaintiff raised objection. As the defendant/ respondent No. 1 refused to pay the monthly rent, the plaintiff /petitioner filed suit for ejectment of the defendant/ respondent No. 1 and for recovery of arrear of rent. The defendant/ respondent No. 1 did not appear before the court as no summons could be served upon him.

(3.) On the other hand, on the basis of an application filed by the defendant/ respondent No. 3 he was impleaded. The defendant/ respondent No. 2 Sahina Khatun wife of the defendant respondent No. 1, contested the suit by filing written statement stating inter alia that the suit is not maintainable and it has no cause of action and also bad for non-joinder of the parties. It was totally denied by the defendant/ respondent No. 2 that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit land and as per her pleading the suit land belonged to the defendant/ respondent No. 3 and after getting permission from him, she constructed tinchali house in which she lives with her daughter. On the other hand, the defendant/ respondent No. 3 denying the claim of the plaintiff/ petitioner pleaded that the land on which the suit house is situated belonged to him and he allowed the defendant/ respondent No. 2 and her daughter to construct a tinchali house and the same has been recorded by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation under holding No. 715 Ward No. 49.