KEWAL KRISHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is un -successful plaintiff's regular second appeal. Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is not liable to pay rent for quarter bearing No. 213 -D situated in Railway Colony, Ludhiana from October, 1978 to April, 1984 as he ceased to occupy the said quarter for the said period. As per averments made in the plaint plaintiff was allotted the aforesaid quarter in the year 1977 when he was serving as Foreman at Ludhiana. According to the plaintiff he remained in possession of the quarter from September, 1977 to October, 1978 when he was transferred on his request to Jalandhar and so he vacated the said quarter. It has been further stated in the plaint that though he had given the possession of the quarter way back in October, 1978, the respondents, however, with a view to unnecessary harass and otherwise also harbouring ill will as he had been successful in a litigation between the plaintiff and the defendants that defendants started making recovery for alleged rent of the quarter for the period from October, 1978 to April, 1984.

(2.) DEFENDANTS put in appearance, filed within statement and controverted the various averments made in the plaint. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed : -

(3.) BEFORE me, the learned counsel for the appellant has almost re -iterated the same submissions which did not find favour with the trial Court or with the lower appellate Court. Admittedly, there is no proof on record that the plaintiff delivered back the possession of the quarter in dispute to the respondents in October, 1978. Rather evidence adduced by the defendants clearly prove that plaintiff remained in occupation of the quarter till April, 1984. It being a finding of fact is not vitiated in any manner. The Courts below rightly held that simple suit for declaration was not maintainable. Resultantly, I find no merit in the appeal and dismiss the same. Parties shall however, bear their own costs.