JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) These two cross - appeals being (1) SB Civil
Second Appeal No.15/2006 Puran Indoria s/o
Gauridutt Indoria, Proprietor, M/s. Indoria
Fabricators and Engineering Works vs. Balashram
Society and (2) SB Civil Second Appeal No.391/2007
Balashram Society vs. Puran Indoria, have been filed by
the tenant and landlord respectively being aggrieved by the
judgment and decree dated 18.11.2005 of the appellate
court below of learned Additional District Judge No.3,
Udaipur deciding the cross-appeals of both the parties and
while dismissing the defendant tenant's appeal
No.27/2000 Puran Indoria s/o Gauridutt Indoria
vs. Balashram Society, the learned appellate court below,
also dismissed the plaintiff landlord's appeal No.58/2000
Balashram Society vs. Puran Indoria and affirmed the
judgment and decree dated 15.12.1999 of the learned trial
court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No.1, Udaipur
in eviction Suit No.16/95 Balashram Society vs.
Puran Indoria in respect of suit shop let out on
13.01.1976 for a monthly rent of Rs.120/- to Shri Puran
Indoria
(2.) The eviction suit No.16/95 Balashram
Society vs. Puran Indoria s/o Gauridutt Indoria,
Proprietor of Indoria Fabricators and Engineering Works,
Udia Pole, Udaipur, was filed on 19.07.1984, inter alia, on
the grounds of default in payment of rent, sub-letting by
tenant to sub-tenant M/s. Kusum Industries, bonafide need
of the landlord of the suit premises and alternative
accommodation becoming available to the defendant
tenant in the form of an industrial plot No.F-219
situated at Mewar Industrial Area, Road No.1, Madri,
Udaipur, in which the defendant tenant had started
manufacturing activities of fabrication of machines, spare
parts etc. The learned trial court decreed the suit of
eviction in respect of the suit shop measuring 20 x 30 ft., in
which tenant installed lathe machines and was doing
miscellaneous engineering and fabrication activities, on the
ground than an alternative accommodation became
available to the defendant tenant under Section 13(1)(i)
of the Act and decided the issue No.5 in favour of the
plaintiff - landlord. The other issues were, however,
decided against the plaintiff landlord, except the issue of
default in payment of rent and the benefit of first default
was given to the defendant - tenant under Section 13(6) of
the 1950 Act.
(3.) The cross appeals were filed by both the
parties before the learned Appellate Court, which as
aforesaid, affirmed the decree of the learned trial court.
Hence, the present two second appeals being (1) SBCSA
No.15/2006 was filed on 19.12.2005 and (2) SBCSA No.
391/2006 was filed on 27.02.2006 by both the parties
before this Court under Section 100 CPC.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.