LAWS(RAJ)-1997-5-75

AMIR BUX Vs. HABIBUR REHMAN

Decided On May 21, 1997
Amir Bux Appellant
V/S
Habibur Rehman Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these cases relate to one suit, they are being disposed of by common order. REVISION NO. 1315/95

(2.) Indisputably, the age of litigation is 20 years. The plaintiff petitioner (for short the land lord) instituted a suit for eviction and recovery of rent in respect of property in question against the defendant non-petitioner (for short the tenant) in the trial court in the year 1977 on the grounds of personal bonafide necessity and default in making payment of rent. The tenant contested the suit by raising various objections out of which main objection was that the property in question was taken on rent by him from one Abdul Rahim and after his death, his daughter's son Abdul Gafoor used to receive rent from him. The trial court after trial dismissed the suit on April 21, 1989. The land lord preferred regular first appeal against the decree of the trial court. During the pendency of the appeal the land lord, on April 15, 1995 moved an application under Order 6 Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure seeking amendment of plaint. The learned appellate court vide order dated Sept. 18, 1995 allowed the application. Against this order that the tenant has filed the instant revision.

(3.) The land lord by way of amendment intended to incorporate in the plaint that though the property in question was purchased through a registered sale deed dated June 8, 1933 but he became the owner of the said property on Nov. 22, 1968 when a compromise decree was passed. After the death of Abdul Karim, Mst. Rahiman and Ziyauddin the whole of the property devolved on him. In the capacity of owner he instituted suits against the other tenants which were decreed. Therefore he was the sole owner and land lord of the property in question. The land lord also sought to amend the plaint raising new ground of eviction 'denial of title by the tenant' and the plea that consideration of partial eviction of the property was also not in favour of the tenant. A prayer of declaration of title was also sought.