SOM NATH AND ORS Vs. OM PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide this order, above mentioned twelve appeals would be disposed of. Both the learned counsel for the parties are one on aforesaid aspect. The facts are being taken from RSA No. 1641 of 2011.

(2.) The plaintiffs-appellants have come in regular second appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below, vide which a suit, for possession of one shop by way of ejectment of the defendant as well as for recovery of damages for illegal and authorised use and for recovery of mesne profits, has been dismissed.

(3.) Plaintiff Som Nath for himself as well as for plaintiffs No.2 to 5, being attorney, filed a suit for possession of one shop, as shown in the plaint, by way of ejectment of the tenant/ defendant on account of non payment of rent from 1.4.2002 to 31.8.2002 @ Rs. 1,300/- per month along with mesne profit. It has been claimed by the plaintiffs that they are owners of 16 shops including the disputed shop, which was let out to the defendant for running a goldsmith shop. The defendant is in arrears of rent w.e.f.1.4.2002 to 31.8.2002, total amounting to Rs. 6,500/- and the defendant has failed to pay the same despite repeated demand. In this way, the tenancy stood terminated in terms of registered notice dated 22.8.2002, issued to the defendant under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act (for short 'the Act') and thus, the possession of the defendant is claimed to be unauthorised. The plaintiffs, being sons of Sada Ram, are owners of 16 shops situated on Mustafabad Road, Mouza Sabalpur District Yamuna Nagar, out of which, one shop, as shown in the head note of the plaint, was rented out to the defendant about 10 years ago. With the aforesaid pleadings, plaintiffs have claimed the possession of the shop as well as for the recovery of arrears and mesne profits @ Rs. 50/- per day for illegal use and occupation of the shop in question.