KESI BAI GAMEDI Vs. KAILASH BIHARI VAJPAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant/defendant, Smt. Kesi Bai W/o Bhagga Ji Gameti, and daughter of late Smt. Kasturi Bai, has filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, aggrieved by the concurrent judgment and decree of possession granted in favour of respondents/plaintiffs, Kailash Bihari Vajpai, Administrator of the Temple of Shri Ekling Ji Trust, Udaipur in respect of 'Kachha House/Hut ( )' in which the mother of the appellant, who was employed by the respondent - Trust for cleaning work, was allowed to stay. After her death, the appellant/defendant, Smt. Kesi Bai and her husband, Sh. Bhaggaji, appear to be in possession of the said disputed house/hut.

(2.) THE relevant findings of the lower first appellate court affirming the findings of learned trial court in this regard in the judgment and decree dated 11.01.2012 is quoted herein below for ready reference: -

(3.) THESE contentions are vehemently opposed by the learned counsels, Mr. Manish Shishodia and Mr. Ramit Mehta, appearing on behalf of respondents/plaintiff Trust, who have submitted that the concurrent findings of fact do not require any interference by this Court under Section 100 of Civil Procedure Code and no substantial question of law arises. He also submitted that not a single word has been stated in the memo of second appeal that the appellant was having her house on the Aaraji No.558 and not on 557 and on the contrary, Aaraji No.557 land belonging to the respondent - Trust, has been admitted by the appellant herself. They also submitted that the factum of her mother, Kasturi Bai given a permissive possession to live in the said 'Kachha House/Hut ( )' at a rent of Rs.275/ - per month, while doing the services of the Temple trust for cleaning work, is clearly admitted by the appellant. Therefore, this subsequently raised defence as an afterthought now at this stage, which was never raised before the courts below, cannot be sustained or even looked into.