GURBAX SINGH Vs. HARMINDERJIT SINGH ALIAS BOBBY CHOUDHRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the second appeal of the defendant, after the suit of the respondent-plaintiff herein (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) was decreed in his favour by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar, and the first appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar.

(2.) The facts leading up to the filing of the suit by the respondent-plaintiff, seeking possession of a shop and for recovery of Rs. 29,700.00, are being taken from the judgments of the learned Courts below.

(3.) As per the plaintiff, he is the owner of the disputed shop, known as Swami Medical Hall, situated in village Kishangarh, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, fully described in the site plan annexed with the plaint. The appellant (defendant) was stated to be in possession of the shop as a tenant, it as a 'medical shop' under the aforesaid name, with the monthly rent being Rs. 825.00. As per the plaintiff the tenancy was from month to month, expiring on 15th day of every month. The defendant was stated to have not paid rent since July 16, 1998, despite repeated requests and demands from the plaintiff. It was further contended that, moreover, the plaintiff did not want to keep the defendant as a tenant any longer. Consequently he terminated the tenancy by issuing a registered 'notice' on 29.05.2004, under Sec. 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, with the termination of the tenancy to come in effect from June 15, 2004. Vide the notice, the plaintiff called upon the defendant to vacate the shop by the aforesaid date and to pay the arrears of rent. That not having been done, it was further contended in the plaint that the possession of the defendant over the shop was illegal and that of a tresspasser. Yet further, it was contended that though the plaintiff was entitled to recover arrears of rent @ Rs. 825.00 per month w.e.f. 16.07.1998, however he was restricting his claim for such arrears to the last 3 years only, as the demand for payment of such arrears would not be barred by limitation. Hence Rs. 29,700.00 was sought to be recovered. On the aforesaid contentions, Civil Suit no.248/04 was instituted by the plaintiff, on 24.07.2004.