S AMAR SINGH Vs. SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHILE admitting this civil second appeal, the learned Single Judge referred to the judgments reported in AIR 1971 MP 142 and AIR 1973 Orrissa 47 and found that the point raised by the appellant regarding the interpretation of Sec. 116 of the Evidence Act was an important question of law which required determination by a larger bench. The contention of the appellant is that under the afore -said provision of the Evidence Act, he could deny the title of his landlord even without surrendering possession as the same had extinguished and the appellant had attorned the paramount title holder.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the present appeal are: that the predecessor -in -interest of the respondents Shri Baij Nath filed a suit for ejectment against the predecessor -in -interest of the appellants, S. Amar Singh the tenant, on the grounds of defaults and sub letting. The trial court framed the following issues in the suit:

(3.) THE plaintiff examined one Waryam Singh and appeared as his own witness. In rebuttal the defendant produced Challa Ram Kasho, Gurbachan Singh, Bawa Singh and Mehboob Shah besides appearing himself as his own witness.