URMILA DEVI Vs. BALDEV RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT RSA is filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 against judgment and decree dated 9.1.2003 passed by learned Additional District Judge Kangra at Dharamshala HP in Civil Appeal No. 61 -B/2001 titled Baldev Raj v. Urmila Devi.

(2.) SMT . Urmila Devi plaintiff filed civil suit for possession of shop situated in khata No. 249 khatauni No. 590 khasra No. 126 measuring 0 -00 -32 hectares mohal and mauza Baijnath District Kangra HP vide jamabandi for the year 1992 -93. Plaintiff also sought additional relief for recovery of Rs. 8100/ - (Eight thousand one hundred) on account of arrears of rent for three years w.e.f. December 1995 to November 1998 @ Rs. 225/ - per month. It is pleaded that plaintiff is owner of shop situated in suit land. It is pleaded that defendant is tenant. It is pleaded that defendant did not pay rent. It is pleaded that shop is in dilapidated condition and it requires major repairs. It is pleaded that shop would collapse at any time. It is pleaded that plaintiff also required the shop for her personal use and occupation. It is pleaded that plaintiff wants to reconstruct shop. It is pleaded that plaintiff requested defendant to pay rent and to vacate the shop but defendant did not accept the request of the plaintiff. It is pleaded that tenancy of the shop is on monthly basis. It is pleaded that plaintiff served notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act 1882 upon defendant terminating the tenancy of defendant. It is pleaded that despite notice defendant did not vacate the shop. Prayer for decree of suit as mentioned in relief clause of plaint sought.

(3.) PLAINTIFF also filed replication and re -asserted the allegations mentioned in the plaint. As per pleadings of parties following issues were framed by learned trial Court on dated 9.5.2000.