RAGHUVAR DAYAL Vs. HARGOVIND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for revision by the defendant Raghuvar Dayal against the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge, Alwar in a suit under section 9 of the Specific Relief Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act ).

(2.) THE plaintiff came to court with the allegations that he had been in possession of a certain shop in Malakhera bazar, Alwar and that it had been let out on his behalf to Shivchand who was the defendant No. 2 in the case. Shivchand in collusion with the defendant Raghuvardayal executed a rent note in the latter's favour on 30-3-1950. On the basis of this rent note a suit was brought by raghuvardayal against Shivchand for ejectment and it was decreed on 27-111950. In execution of this decree for ejectment Raghuvardayal got possession of the shop in dispute from Shivchand. The plaintiff came to know about this when possession had been taken on 3-8-1951 by Raghubardayal. The plaintiff stated in his plaint that by the action of the defendant, he was dispossessed without his consent otherwise than in due course of law. He therefore prayed for possession of the property in dispute.

(3.) THE defendant alleged in his written statement that the shop in dispute was the joint property of Hargovind plaintiff as well as Raghuvardayal defendant and that the plaintiff's father Ramkanwar was managing the shop on behalf of both the owners. It was alleged that although the rent note had been executed by shivchand in favour of Ramkanwar and his son Hargovind, the plaintiff, on 4-101948, but later on by the consent of the plaintiff's father Ramkanwar a rent note dated 30-3-1950 was executed by Shivchand in favour of Raghuvardayal and he was put in possession of the property in dispute. Allegations of collusion were denied and it was pleaded that the suit could not be brought Under Section 9 of the Act under the circumstances of the case.