KAMAL KUMAR Vs. RAM DHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree, dated 7.6.2008, of learned Additional District Judge, whereby appeal filed by the appellant- defendant against the judgment and decree, dated 30.11.2006, of the trial Court, decreeing the suit of the respondent-plaintiff, has been dismissed.

(2.) A suit was filed by late Smt. Savitri Devi, now dead and represented by her legal representatives, in the year 2002, seeking issuance of mandatory injunction, directing the appellant-defendant to vacate a shop in Tutu Bazar, which she claimed to have given to the appellant-defendant as a licensee for a period of three months in 1999, by means of writing Ext. PW1/B. Mesne profits for the period from October, 2002 onwards @ 500/- per day, had also been claimed.

(3.) Suit was contested by the appellant-defendant. He denied that he was a licensee. He stated that he had been a tenant in the shop, in question, since the year 1993 and paying rent @ Rs.1800/- per month. It was also pleaded by him that when in the year 1999, plaintiff came to know that Tutu, a suburb of Shimla, was going to be notified as Nagar Panchayat and on account of that it was to become urban area, within the meaning of HP Urban Rent Control Act, plaintiff asked him to vacate the shop, in question, and when he expressed his inability to vacate it, immediately, and told her that he was likely to get a shop from a Cooperative Society, at a public auction, she obtained his signature on a stamp paper, which was blank at that time saying that writing to the effect that he would vacate the shop on getting a shop at auction would be prepared and that paper had been used by her to prepare document of licence Ext. PW1/B.