VINEET KOTHARI, J. - (1.) THIS appeal under Section 96 of the C.P.C. is directed against the judgment and decree of learned Additional District Judge, No. 7, Jaipur City dated 22.12.1980. The present appeal has been filed by the defendant Prem Chand son of Shri Gulab Chand, the judgment -debtor, now represented through his legal representatives.
(2.) THE facts in brief giving rise to this appeal are that the decree -holder -plaintiff Khajulal, now represented through his legal representatives Shri Motichand and others filed a suit for partition and possession of the half portion of a residential house known as 'Haveli' situated at Chokadi Ramchandraji in Jaipur. The said Haveli was a joint Hindu Undivided Family property of Gulab Chand and one Maliram having half share each. In a decree passed in favour of one Ganga Pratap against defendant Gulab Chand in execution case No. 654/42, the said half share of Gulab Chand of the Haveli was attached and auctioned, which was purchased by plaintiff Khajulal in a court auction on 6.1.1942 for a sum of Rs. 1,005/ - and the sale certificate in this regard was also issued by the Executing Court on 30.11.1942. The said decree -holder Khajulal filed an application for possession of he said one -half portion of Gulab Chand in the Haveli and the symbolic possession of the same was given to him on 17.11.1943 by the Bailiff of the Court with the following report, which is reproduced hereunder in Hindi and Urdu language as it is and the bracketed English translation as informed by learned Counsel by referring to the dictionary. .........[vernacular ommited text]........... That on 10.9.1973 after the death of Khajulal, his successors Motichand and others filed the present suit for partition and possession of the one half share in the said Haveli belonging to the judgment -debtor Gulab Chand claiming the following reliefs in the suit, which is also reproduced in Hindi as given in the plaint, as under: .........[vernacular ommited text]...........
(3.) LEARNED trial Court framed as many as 13 issues in the trial of the suit, which are reproduced from the impugned judgment, as under: 1. Whether half of the house detailed in para No. 1 of the plaint which belonged to defendant's father Gulab Chand was put to auction in execution case No. 654/42 and was purchased by the plaintiff's ancestor Khajulal in Court auction sale? 2. Whether Gulab Chand after the said auction sale attorned as a tenant to said Khajulal and then to his sons by executing rent notes (including one of 24.9.58) and paying rent at the rate of Rs. 5/6 per month to them. 3. Whether there exists a relationships of landlord and tenant between the parties to the suit? 4. Whether an amount of Rs. 872/ - as rent and of Rs. 902/ - as damages for use and occupation is due to the plaintiff from the defendant? 5. Whether the defendant is a defaulter within the meaning of Section 13(1)(a) of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1950 and liable to be evicted as such from the plaintiff's share of the suit house? 6. Whether the tenancy of defendant regarding the suit house has been determined by a valid notice to quit? 7. Whether the plaintiffs as successors of Khajulal are entitled to the partition and possession in respect of their half share in the suit house? 8. Whether the suit for partition and eviction cannot be tried together? 9. Whether the suit is barred by limitation? 10. Whether the plaintiffs had not been in possession of the suit house within a period of 12 years from the date of institution of the suit ? If so, to what effect? 11. In case issue No. 1 comes to be decided in favour of the plaintiffs, whether the defendant and his ancestors are in adverse possession of Khajulal's share of house and had acquired ownership therein by prescription? 12. Whether the suit is undervalued and the court fee deficient. 13. Relief? ;