KAMLA DEVI Vs. IDOL MANDIR SH.LAXMIKANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit property, which is ground floor of a building, as detailed in the plaint was owned by Idol plaintiff -respondent. According to the case of the plaintiff, the said property was in occupation of the defendant -appellants on token rent of Rs, 5 per annum and the upper storey was in occupation of the Education Department. The defendants refused to pay the rent and started asserting title in themselves. Thereafter, tenancy of the defendants was terminated by serving a registered notice under section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Notice was refused by the defendants. The suit for possession, as such, was filed.

(2.) The defendants contested the suit and pleaded that the suit was time barred and the plaintiff was estopped from suing by his act and conduct. On merit, case of the defendants has been that the entire building including ground floor and upper storey were in occupation of the defendants and it was further averred that the defendants have been in adverse possession of the land since Rabi 1955 -56. According to them, previously Kushi Ram the father of Rajinder and Tilak Raj defendants and husband of Kamla Devi was in possession of the suit land without payment of rent. It was also alleged that after his death, the defendants were in adverse possession of the suit land. The tenancy, as pleaded by the plaintiff, has been denied. Again, it was pleaded that the plaintiff could not ask the defendants to vacate the premises as the defendants have become owners of the suit property by adverse possession for more than 12 years which was open and hostile to the knowledge of the plaintiff. The other averments were not admitted.

(3.) Parties were put to trial on the following issues by the trial Court :