SADHU SINGH Vs. TILAK RAJ DHILLON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Una, H.P. dated 31.01.2003, passed in Civil Appeal No. 22 of 2000.

(2.) KEY facts, necessary for the adjudication of this regular second appeal are that the appellant -plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) has filed suit for possession by way of redemption of the shops consisting of two rooms situated in Una town detailed in head -note of the plaint on payment of Rs. 4000/ - principle mortgage money. According to the averments made in the plaint, Wattan Singh alias Hari Kishan Singh son of Hakam Singh, the father of the plaintiff, was owner in possession of shops A & B. The shops were situated in Kh. No. 1039/1 entered in jamabandi for the year 1976 -77. The father of the plaintiff has mortgaged with possession the shops to defendant No. 1, vide registered mortgage deed dated 4.8.1981 for consideration of Rs. 4000/ -. The mortgagor has not authorized the mortgagee to induct defendant No. 2 as tenant over the disputed shop -A vide rent deed dated 6.8.1981 Ext. P -2 and also inducted defendant No. 3 as tenant over shop -B vide rent deed dated 3.9.1982, Ext. P -3. The plaintiff succeeded to the estate of his father. He requested the defendants several times to deliver the possession of the shops in dispute to him through redemption.

(3.) THE suit was contested by defendants No. 2 & 3. According to defendant No. 2, he was tenant of shop on payment of monthly rent of Rs. 600/ - under the plaintiff. The shop was taken on rent by defendant No. 2 from late Sh. Wattan Singh on monthly rent of Rs. 150/ -. Thereafter, Wattan Singh constructed the pucca shop and it was let out to defendant No. 2 on monthly rent of Rs. 600/ -. He has been paying the rent previously to Wattan Singh and after his death to the plaintiff Sadhu Singh. Similarly, defendant No. 3 stated that he had taken one shop from Wattan Singh on payment of rent of Rs. 700/ -. He has been paying rent to Wattan Singh and after his death to the plaintiff Sadhu Singh. The plaintiff's father was not issuing receipts to them. The father of the plaintiff had obtained their signatures on documents purporting to be rent note in favour of Tilak Raj defendant No. 1 in the month of September/August, 1981. They have never paid any rent to defendant No. 1.