9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e this Court in this second appeal. 2. The Trial Court recorded a finding that the tenancy between the plaintiff and the defendant No.1 in respect of the suit property created on 16-4-1984 has not been proved by the plaintiff, so also the claim regarding arrears of rent of Rs. 810/- for the period from 15-7-1985 to 14-4-1986. The lower Appellate Court has reversed this finding and it is held that the plaintiff has established the relationship of "Landlord and Tenant" between him and the defendant No.1, and the tenancy was validly terminated, and hence the decree for possession as well as for arrears of rent of Rs. 810/- has been passed. 3. This Court framed the following substantial questions of law while admitting this second appeal on 7-7-2015 : "1. Whether the document styled as agreement of lease (Ex.50) is sufficient to hold that the present appellant surrendered his tenancy and therefor his father i.e. original defendant No.1 became tenant of suit property. 2. Whether Ex.50 was inadmissible in evidence. 3. Whether evidence of P.W.2 - Govindrao Dharam can be relied upon to hold that the agreement of lease at Ex.50 is proved." 4. The plaintiff came up before the Trial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he month of February 1986, the rent was increased to Rs. 90/-, which was sent by money order and accepted by the plaintiff. The said receipt is produced on record at Exhibit 55. He further stated that in the month of March 1986, he sent Rs. 60/- by way of money order to the plaintiff, because the plaintiff stopped the supply of water and electricity, which returned to him, as it was refused. 8. Before the Trial Court, the following issues were framed and answered as under : Sr.No. Issues Findings i Does the plaintiff prove that he leased out the suit premises to the defendant no.1 on 15.4.1984 and deft. executed the agreement to that effect. No ii Does he further prove that the deft.no.1 is in arrears of Rs. 810/- towards the rent for the period 15.7.85 to 14.4.86? No iii Does he prove that he validly and legally terminated the tenancy of the defendant with effect from the mid- night of 14.4.86? No iv (Deleted) Does the deft. 2 prove that the deft. no.1 alone is the tenant of suit premises? Deleted v Does the deft. no.2 prove that he paid Rs. 1000/- to the plaintiff as Pagdi (Advance)? No vi Does he prove that he paid the rent upto the month of February 1986? ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not entered the witness-box to refute the document at Exhibit 50. The execution of this document has been spoken about by the plaintiff in her evidence at Exhibit 46 and the document goes to show that from 16-4-1984 onwards, it is the defendant No.1, who represented the lease-hold rights in respect of the suit property. The lower Appellate Court has taken into consideration the evidence of the attesting witness. It has also taken into consideration that the defendant Nos.1 and 2 are the father and son and this relationship cannot be forgotten. On such findings, the lower Appellate Court has held that the document at Exhibit 50 has been proved. Apart from this, the Trial Court has recorded the finding that the defendant No.2 has failed to prove that he has paid Rs. 1,000/- to the plaintiff as Pagdi (Advance) and the rent at the rate of Rs. 90/- per month was paid upto the month of February 1986. It is not the case of the defendant No.2 that he paid the rent at the rate of Rs. 90/- till February 1986. Thus, there is other evidence available on record in support of the findings of the lower Appellate Court. The findings are based on evidence available and its appreciation. At any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... defendant No.1 in the present case has been established, coupled with the other evidence available on record. The substantial questions of law at Serial No.2 is answered accordingly. There is no substance in this second appeal, and the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. 13. At this stage, Shri V.V. Bhangde, the learned counsel for the appellant/defendant No.2, submits that his arguments that the document at Exhibit 50 has not been proved, the view taken by the lower Appellate Court is not even a possible view of the matter, and the findings recorded by the lower Appellate Court are perverse, have not been dealt with in this judgment, which is dictated in open Court. He, therefore, insisted that the said points be dealt with. I think whatever arguments have been understood are dealt with in this judgment. If any points are left out, Shri Bhangde was asked to place on record the written notes of arguments, which can be dealt with subsequently while checking the judgment. Since there is insistence on the part of Shri Bhangde to deal with such points now, I make it clear that the consciousness of this Court about such admissions of the attesting witness is reflected in the jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. Such a stage by a Court may be construed of blacklisting of a lawyer. Seldom, such event occurs, and the Courts also normally avoid it. 16. A tendency has started growing amongst lawyers to dictate a Judge to recuse from taking up his matters when the decision goes against his client or his wavelength does not match with the Judge or he does not find comfort in conducting the matter or for some such reasons. This is an insult personally to a Judge. Such reactions are normally experienced when the lawyers take heavy fees from their clients with an assurance to bring the result of the cases in their favour or to impress upon the clients sitting in the court room during the course of hearing, the boldness which he possesses to browbeat the Court. If a lawyer exercises his choice of not conducting the matter, he loses his client and fees, which he does not want to do. If a Judge accedes to such demand of a lawyer for recusal, the effect is three-fold - (i) the confidence of a lawyer to browbeat the Court is boosted, (ii) a lawyer gets rid of the Court where he finds discomfort in conducting the matter, and (iii) it creates an additional source of income for him, from the other lawy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
