Zubeda vs Narendra
2021 Latest Caselaw 3987 MP

                                                                      1                                SA-630-2020
                                            The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                        SA-630-2020
                                                       (ZUBEDA AND OTHERS Vs NARENDRA AND OTHERS)


                                    Jabalpur, Dated : 05-08-2021
                                          Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                          Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the appellants.
                                          Heard on admission.
                                          The appellant/plaintiff has filed this Second Appeal under Section 100
                                    of the Code of Civil Procedure feeling aggrieved by judgment and decree of

                                    the trial court dated 22.12.2018 passed in RCS-A 215/2008. The Appellate
                                    Court judgment dated 16.01.2020 passed in RCA No.08/2019 is also called in
                                    question in this Second Appeal.
                                          The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction and arrears of rent

against the appellants/defendants. The trial court after framing the issues has allowed the suit, against which, an appeal has been filed and the appellate Court has also passed a detail judgment and decree after considering each and every aspect of the matter while dismissing the appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Courts below have

wrongly held that there was landlord and tenant relationship between the plaintiffs and defendants by taking into consideration the notice of eviction sent by the plaintiffs. There is no evidence at all to show that the defendants/appellants had ever paid rent to the plaintiffs/respondents. Hence, it is required to be decided by this Court that whether both the Courts below have committed any error of law and fact while decreeing the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs.

From a perusal of the record, it is seen that both the Courts have considered the pleadings of the parties and framed the issues on the basis of rival stand. After marshaling the entire evidence, the issues were properly decided by the Courts below. There are concurrent findings of fact by both the Courts below. Learned counsel for the appellants is unable to show that Signature Not Verified SAN there was specific denial by the appellants/defendants in the written statement Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2021.08.05 16:25:59 IST 2 SA-630-2020 with respect of receipt of notice of eviction as well as the fact that the findings recorded by the Courts below are either contrary to record or perverse. No substantial question of law could be pointed-out which needs adjudication in the present second appeal. In view of the concurrent findings of fact, I find no reason to entertain this appeal.

The Second Appeal being bereft of merit, is hereby dismissed.

(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)) JUDGE

sj

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Date: 2021.08.05 16:25:59 IST