SAWANRAJ YADAV Vs. R.GAJANAND YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With consent finally heard, Sri Umesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Aadesh Varma, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution assails the order dtd. 15/2/2024 in I.A.No.556 of 2023 in O.S.No.2374 of 2023 on the file of XX Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, whereby, the application filed under Order XV-A Rule 1 read with Sec. 151 of CPC filed by the plaintiff/landlord/respondent herein was allowed by the Court below.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners herein i.e., defendant/tenants submits that the said order is bad in law. During the course of hearing, he fairly submitted that no doubt the plaintiff's mother was the landlord of the suit schedule property. However, she sold the said property to the father of defendants through an unregistered document in the year 2002. Thereafter, no rent was paid by the defendants or their father. The father of defendants died in the year 2021. There is no jural relationship between the plaintiff and the defendants. There is no rent receipt which shows that the defendants have ever paid rent to the plaintiff. By placing reliance on the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Aritaakula Satyanarayana Murthy vs. Patchipulusu Naga Suneetha, . it is submitted that when there exists a serious dispute about the relationship of landlord and tenant and also about the title between both the parties, full-fledged trial should be conducted. It is submitted that along with the un-registered document to sell the mother of plaintiff provided all original documents of title to the father of defendants. The Court below has committed error in allowing the application preferred under Order XV-A Rule 1 read with Sec. 151 of the CPC.