TEJ SINGH Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, AMBALA CITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Plaintiff -Appellants Tej Singh and Arjan Singh are running fodder machine stall in Anaj Mandi, Ambala City, in stall No. 1659. The site underneath the stall belongs to the Municipal Committee, Ambala City, the Defendant -Respondent. The Plaintiffs alleged that they erected a temporary stall in the year 1954 after getting the site on rent from the Defendant at Rs. 15/ - per month. On 10.5.1971 an official of the Defendant came to the stall and asked them to vacate the same within 2/3 days otherwise the stall would be got vacated with police help. The Plaintiffs filed the instant suit for permanent injunction restraining the Defendant from ejecting them from the said stall alleging that they being the tenants could not be thrown out of the stall without due process of law and without service of prior notice on them before taking out any ejectment proceedings, styling the demand of the Defendant to vacate the stall as illegal and unjustified. The Defendant in its written statement contested the suit. It was alleged that the site in dispute was never given to the Plaintiffs on rent at Rs. 15/ - per month. It was averred that the Plaintiffs had entered into an unauthorised possession of the site which vested in Defendant. After the matter came to its notice and the Defendant proposed to take action, the Plaintiff applied that the site be given to them on tehbazari. On that application it passed resolution No. 16 dated 22.3.1955 in which it was resolved that recovery of the amount for the previous occupation at the rate of Rs. 15/ - per month be made but they should be dispossessed of the site in dispute. It was further resolved through resolution No. 60 dated 16.5.1959 to take out proceedings for the eviction of the Plaintiffs. The suit was dismissed by the learned Sub Judge Second Class, Ambala Cantt. vide judgment and decree dated 15.6.1974. An appeal filed by the Plaintiffs also failed and the same was dismissed by the learned Senior Sub Judge exercising enhanced appellate powers, Ambala, vide judgment and decree dated 27.8.1977. This is how the Plaintiffs filed the present regular second appeal in this Court.

(2.) It may be mentioned that during the pendency of this appeal Tej Singh Plaintiff -Appellant died and his legal representatives were brought on record vide order dated 20.5.1983 in C. M. No. 1388 -C of 1983.

(3.) Both the learned Courts below have discarded the Appellants' claim that they are the tenants of the Respondent at Rs. 15/ - per month on the site in dispute. The learned Counsel for the Appellants reiterated this stand. He brought to my notice the receipts Exs. P. 1, P.2 and P.3 issued by an official of the Respondent by which the amount realised from them is styled as rent. He, therefore, contended that they were in occupation of the site as tenant under the Respondent and in no other capacity. Simply because the word 'rent' has been used in the receipt while collecting the amount from the Appellants on account of tehbazari, I do not think that it would constitute a tenancy. It is well known that for a municipal site given for use the Municipal Committee realises tehbazari. The stand of the Respondent that only tehbazari was collected and the Appellants were treated as unauthorised occupants of the site is fully borne out from the record I, therefore, find no force in this contention of the learned Counsel for the Appellants.