LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-351

KRISHAN DAHIYA Vs. MASTER SHARWAN SINGH

Decided On October 05, 2015
KRISHAN DAHIYA Appellant
V/S
Master Sharwan Singh Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is regular second appeal against the judgment dated 25.11.2013 whereby suit of plaintiff Master Swaran Singh was decreed and the defendant was directed to hand over vacant physical possession of suit property i.e. ground floor of H.No.1452/1, Mahavir Pura, New Railway Road, Gurgaon to the plaintiff.

(2.) Plaintiff Master Swaran Singh is father-in-law of defendant Krishan Dahiya. He has alleged that in the year 2006, defendant along with his wife requested for shelter for a short time as their business had ruined at their native place. The plaintiff allowed them to live on the ground floor of his house as licensee. The defendant used to consume alcohol and misbehaved with plaintiff and his wife. He also threatened the plaintiff and asked him to hand over possession and ownership of their house to him by way of gift or otherwise. In August, 2008 he filed civil suit seeking relief of injunction raising plea of his possession over the suit property as tenant under the plaintiff. He was sent a legal notice dated 9.6.2009 calling upon him to vacate the ground floor of the demised premises but of no avail resulting in filing of the suit.

(3.) The defendant claimed himself to be tenant in the demised premises and alleged that plaintiff was residing in a separate house bearing no. 1454 which he sold away in the year 2008 and requested the defendant to accommodate him and his wife. In view of his relationship, the defendant allowed the plaintiff to live on the first floor of the house in a single room. The defendant has been residing in the disputed house at the monthly rent of Rs. 500/- plus Rs. 400/- for electricity charges since 1998. The plaintiff wanted to enhance the rent from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 2000/- per month which the defendant resisted. In order to pressurize him the instant suit had been filed. Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Gurgaon discarded the plea taken by the defendant-appellant about the tenancy and observed that he is in possession of the suit property as a licensee. The suit filed by the plaintiff was held as maintainable in view of the observations in the case of Surjit Kaur vs. Balwinder Kaur, 2005 2 HRR 536. The appeal filed by the defendant was also dismissed by the first appellate court.