RUKMINI VITHU Vs. RAYAJI DATTATRAYA PAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff sued to evict the defendant from the house in suit on the ground that the defendant was his tenant and that she had forfeited the tenancy by disclaimer of her landlord's title in her written statement in suit No. 227 of 1913.

(2.) The defendant's main plea was that she was a permanent tenant and held under one Ghurye who was a permanent tenant of the plaintiff.

(3.) The lower appellate Court found that the written statement of the defendant was a disclaimer of the landlord's title and that the plaintiff was justified in forfeiting the tenancy; that the question of tenancy was res judicata because in suit No. 227 of 1913 which the plaintiff had filed against the defendant before the Subordinate Judge exercising the powers of the Small Cause Court, a decree had been made against the defendant for payment of rent on the footing that she was a tenant of the plaintiff. The Judge also found on the evidence that the tenancy was not permanent.