SHUBDESH SINGH Vs. DALJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed, against, the concurrently recorded verdicts by both the learned Courts below, whereby, the plaintiffs' suit for possession of the suit premises, was, hence decreed.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff has filed a suit for possession by way of ejectment of the defendant from shop existing over the land comprised in Khata No. 3 in, Khatauni No. 4 min, Khasra No. 1545, measuring 0-1-35 HM, situated in Mohal and Muaza Bari, on the main road Jassur to Jawali on right side of Market of Raja-ka-Talab, Tehsil Nurpur, District Kangra, H. P. (hereinafter referred as the suit premises). The suit premises is situated between the shops of Surinder Cloth House and Pinku Hardware Sachedev at Raja-ka-Talab. On account of cordial relations, the plaintiff rented out the suit premises to defendant on monthly rent of Rs. 2000/- as per their oral agreement. The defendant promised to vacate the suit premises on the completion of construction of his own shop at Rajaka-talab. Despite having sufficient land on the road side, the defendant did not construct his own shop as promised and also stopped paying rent from January, 2010. The plaintiff is unemployed and as such, he intends to run his own business in the suit premises. The tenancy stood terminated vide legal notice dated 18. 3. 2011. Even after termination of tenancy, the defendant, did not handover the vacant possession of the suit premises, hence the suit.

(3.) The defendant contested the suit and filed written statement, wherein, he has taken preliminary objections inter alia locus standi, estoppel and maintainability etc. On merits, while denying the tenancy, the defendant contended that Subhash Singh, the brother of the plaintiff is owner of the suit premises and he rented out the same tot he defendant on monthly rent of Rs. 500/- in February, 1996, with the condition that tenancy is irrevocable subject to increase of rent from time to time. The rent has been increased with mutual consent of the parties and at present the rent of the suit premises is Rs. 1500/- per month. The plaintiff has not constructed the suit premises and the same was construed by his brother Subhash Singh and as such, electricity connection was also existing in his name. The plaintiff has connived with his brother Subhash Singh, in order to harass the defendant and moved an application to the electricity department in April, 2011 to disconnect the electricity connection of the suit premises. The defendant to moved an application to the electricity department on 5. 4. 2011 with request not to disconnect the said electricity connection, however, electricity connection was disconnected on 6. 4. 2011. The defendant denied that the plaintiff rented out the suit premises to him on monthly rent of Rs. 2000/-. The defendant is regularly paying the rent to Subhash Singh. The defendant has invested huge amount and is running business of hardware and it is not possible for him to shift the business from the suit premises. The plaintiff has no legitimate right to terminate the tenancy and the alleged legal notice is frivolous. The suit premises is partly constructed on the Government Land and about 3/4th of the same is within the controlled width of the road and is liable to be demolished by State. The defendant denied the remaining averments and prayed for dismissal of the suit.