DARSHAN SINGH AND 4 ORS Vs. PARAG GOGOI
LAWS(GAU)-2018-2-22
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on February 19,2018

Darshan Singh And 4 Ors Appellant
VERSUS
Parag Gogoi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Kalyan Rai Surana, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. R. Jain, the learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. C. Baruah, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. L. Yangzom, the learned Counsel for the respondent.
(2.) By this revision under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, the petitioners have assailed the first appellate judgment and decree dated 28.03.2012 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Dibrugarh in Title Appeal No. 15/2009, by which the judgment and decree dated 15.05.2009, passed by the learned Munsiff No.1, Dibrugarh in Title Suit No. 152/2006 was set aside and reversed.
(3.) The petitioners are the plaintiffs in the said suit. It was stated that they were the landlords of the respondent in respect of the suit premises comprising of 429 square feet in the first floor of the two storied RCC building at Dibrugarh as described in the Schedule of the plaint and that it was agreed that the respondent would pay monthly rent of Rs.2,150/- for the said tenanted premises. It was projected that the respondent had been irregular in paying monthly rent to the petitioners and from November, 2005 he had stopped paying any rent. It was claimed that the respondent had been allowed to run a "Beer Bar" from the tenanted premises. However, it was stated that without their consent, the respondent had started to run a "Hot Bar" from the suit premises. Similarly, it was stated that the respondent had also installed air-conditioner without their consent, for the petitioners had also complained before ASEB. Accordingly, on 19.12.2005 and 07.09.2006, they served Advocate's notice to vacate the suit premises and to pay the arrear monthly rents, which was not complied. Moreover, claiming bona fide requirement for the suit premises for the business of petitioner No.5, the suit was filed for ejection of the respondent, for realizing arrear rent and other reliefs.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.