BRAHAM DEV SOOD Vs. JUGAL KISHORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Solan, in Civil Appeal No. 27 FTC/13 of 2007 dated 16.08.2007, vide which, learned Appellate Court dismissed the appeal so filed by the present appellant against the judgment and decree passed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kandaghat, in Civil Suit No. 47-K/1 of 2001 dated 31.07.2006, whereby learned trial Court had partly decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff for recovery.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present case are that the appellant/plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff, filed a suit for recovery of Rs.28,696/- w.e.f. 01.07.1998 to 30.06.2001 @ Rs.700/- per mensem i.e. Rs.25,200/- as principal amount and Rs.3,496/- on account of interest @ 9% per annum, on the ground that the plaintiff was owner of a single storeyed house consisting of 2 rooms and 2 kitchen, situated below the Parkash Saw Mill on Kalka Shimla Road in Kandaghat Town, Tehsil Kandaghat, District Solan and the said accommodation was given to defendant on rent for residence purpose in the month of April, 1984 by the plaintiff @ Rs.300/- per mensem and besides this, the defendant was also required to pay Rs.15/- per mensem as water charges to the plaintiff. As per the plaintiff, he determined the tenancy of the defendant from 31.07.1996 by issuance of a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. Therefore, as per the plaintiff, the possession of the defendant since 01.08.1996 was unlawful and unauthorized. It was further pleaded by the plaintiff that had the defendant vacated the house on or before 31.07.1996, then the plaintiff could have gained more benefits from the said premises. The demised premises in the year 1996 could have had been rented out by the plaintiff @ Rs.800/- per mensem which was the rent prevalent in the vicinity. On these basis, the plaintiff claimed mesne profit w.e.f. 01.07.1998 upto 30.06.2001 @ Rs.700/- per annum alongwith interest.

(3.) The suit so filed by the plaintiff was contested by the defendant, inter aia, on the ground that the demised premises were not rented out to the defendant by the plaintiff at the rate of Rs.300/- P.M. but were in fact rented out at the rate of Rs.150/- P.M., as has been held by the Court of learned Additional District Judge in its judgment and decree dated 08.12.2003 passed in Civil Appeal No. 2-S/13 of 2003 in case titled Jugal Kishore Vs. Braham Dev Sood. It was further the case put up by the defendant that the alleged determination of the tenancy by way of alleged notice w.e.f. 31.07.1996 was totally wrong and illegal and the same stood set aside by learned Additional District Judge, Solan, in Civil Appeal No. 2-S/13 of 2003. It is further denied that premises in issue could have been rented out for an amount of Rs.800/- per mensem in the year 1996 and as per the defendant, there was no such rent prevalent in the vicinity for such like accommodation as alleged. Thus, the suit of the plaintiff was resisted by the defendant inter alia on the said grounds.