SUBASH GUPTA Vs. YADAP NEPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Title Suit for declaration, possession, injunction and consequential reliefs was filed by the petitioner herein, as the plaintiff, in the year 2012 claiming his right to tenancy in the four storeyed RCC building situated at Pakyong-Rorathang road, Paky;ong, East Sikkim owned by late Dilli Ram Nepal and;presently by his son the sole respondent, Yadap Nepal as he defendant.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is based on the allegation that the respondent would use his influence with the local police to threaten the petitioner out of the building tenanted. The situation compelled the petitioner to sign on a document/agreement prepared by the respondent. Subsequently, on 25.11.2005 the petitioner lodge a First Information Report (FIR) against the respondent, the officer-in-charge of the Pakyong P.S and others with the Superintendent of Police who took prompt initiative and directed investigation by the SDPO, which is pending. The respondent's ill intention of evicting the petitioner by any means led to various illegal acts of the respondent. The respondent, without notice transferred the electric connection of the building in the respondent's name from that of his Late father. The respondent also started mass propaganda against the petitioner in social network sites and connived with the officials of the Power and Energy Department of the Government of Sikkim and on 04.04.2012 disconnected the supply of electricity to the building which led to the filing of a pending complaint under Section 499 and 153 A Indian Penal Code, (IPC) for defamation and spreading communal hatred by the petitioner against the respondent. In pursuance of the said illegal purpose of evicting the petitioner, the respondent started a proceeding before the SubDivisional Magistrate under Section 133 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) which led to the passing of the Order by the District Magistrate directing the petitioner to immediately vacate the said building. This order of the District Magistrate had been passed without serving a copy of the complaint or the report obtained from the Assistant Engineer, UD & HD, Government of Sikkim. The petitioner further alleged that the respondent had conspired with his kin against the petitioner to evict him unlawfully and in furtherance of the said plan they had also disconnected the electricity supply and since 04.04.2012 there is in fact no electricity supply in the said building causing huge financial losses. The petitioner sought to rely upon a list of documents which included, inter-alia, the copies of the Section 133 of Cr.P.C. proceedings before the District Magistrate.

(3.) On 03.07.2012 the respondent filed his written statement contesting the Title Suit. The respondent denied that late Dilli Ram Nepal had inducted the petitioner as a tenant in the entire building of the respondent and further stated that as per the version of the attesting witnesses to the agreement dated 10.11.1998, late Dilli Ram Nepal had only agreed to let out the road level floor measuring 18 x 36. However, it now appears that the petitioner had discreetly entered the words "ground floor to top" in the space which was left blank and meant to be filled up by appropriate English term to describe the sweet meat shop which the executants and the witnesses were not able to appropriately coin. The respondent contested the allegation of the petitioner regarding disconnection of electricity by stating that it was a suo-motto action on the part of the Power Department. The respondent also contested the allegation of the petitioner of falsely and illegally obtaining orders under Section 133 Cr.P.C. from the District Magistrate by stating that the respondent had in fact legally moved the competent Authority and followed the due process of law. The respondent would also rely upon a list of documents which inter alia, contained copy of the line disconnection notice issued by the Power Department, the eviction notice of the District Magistrate under Section 141 of Cr.P.C. and the final order under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. also passed by the District Magistrate dated 21.06.2012.