NIRMAL SINGH Vs. JARNAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendants of the case are before this Court in present Regular Second Appeal against the concurrent findings of the Courts below. Plaintiff Jarnail Singh (respondent herein) is the father of defendant No.1 Nirmal Singh, father-in-law of defendant No.2 Balkiran Kaur and grandfather of defendant No.3 Bir Yuvraj Singh.

(2.) It is not disputed that plaintiff is exclusive owner of House No.MIG-1336/7, Phase-XI, Sector-65, Mohali. In one portion of the said house, defendants are residing. Alleging that behavior of the defendants had become indifferent to the plaintiff, who had disowned him, the plaintiff claimed that he had revoked the licence of the defendants and had asked them to vacate the property in terms of legal notice dtd. 9/7/2021 within a period of 30 days but defendants failed to do so. Plaintiff prayed for decree of mandatory injunction to direct the defendants to hand over vacant possession of the part of the suit property under their occupation and also to pay Rs.10,000.00 per month as user and occupation charges till handing over the possession.

(3.) Assailing the aforesaid findings, the only contention raised by learned counsel for the appellants is that jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred under Sec. 27 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 [Act, 2007] and therefore, the Civil Court could not have decreed the suit.