RAJ KUMAR Vs. PREM PARKASH KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is first appeal by Raj Kumar and other defendants against Sardarni Prem Parkash Kaur plaintiff. It is directed against the judgment of Shri Om Parkash Saini, Sub-Judge 1st Class, Ludhiana dated August 31, 1962 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for possession of a building bearing unit number B. II 1745 situated in the town of Ludhiana.

(2.) THE property in dispute belonged to Sardar Gajjan Singh. He had a son Jaswant Singh. The plaintiff was married to Jaswant Singh. On August 8, 1928, Sardar Gajjan Singh executed a will in favour of Jaswant Singh bequeathing all his property including the property in dispute. In that will, he provided that Smt. Ajmer Kaur, mother of Jaswant Singh shall have the right of residence in the property during her lifetime. Sardar Gajjan Singh died on June 10, 1929. Jaswant Singh succeeded to the property by virtue of inheritance as well as on the strength of will. Jaswant Singh died on March 12, 1936. The plaintiff succeeded to his entire property including the property in dispute. Smt. Ajmer Kaur died on April 6, 1961. The defendants took from Smt. Ajmer Kaur on rent the property in dispute. The plaintiff filed suit for possession of the property against Raj Kumar, Mangat Rai and Kulwant Rai partners of the firm Messrs Khushal Singh and Company and the firm itself pleading that Smt. Ajmer Kaur being entitled only to right of residence of the property in dispute had no right to let out the same to the defendants. It was also pleaded in the alternative that even if Smt. Ajmer Kaur could give the property on rent, the plaintiff is not bound after her death by the tenancy so created in favour of the defendants. It was pleaded on behalf of the plaintiff that the possession of the defendants is of trespassers.

(3.) MANGAT Rai defendant filed written statement saying that he had no concern with the firm Messrs Khushal Singh and Company and he had been unnecessarily impleaded in the suit as a defendant. In their written statement, the other three defendants pleaded that they are tenants under the plaintiff on the basis of rent deed dated September 8, 1953 executed by Raj Kumar in favour of the plaintiff, when she was the owner in possession of the property in dispute. They also pleaded in the alternative that the rights of tenancy created by Smt. Ajmer Kaur were inherited by the plaintiff as successor land-lady of the defendants and consequently the defendants continued to be the tenants of the plaintiff. In the replication filed on behalf of the plaintiff, the plaintiff denied execution of rent deed dated September 8, 1953 in her favour. The plea of the defendants that Smt. Ajmer Kaur was entitled to let out the property in dispute in favour of the defendants was also repudiated.