Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

35. Mr Rajesh Sharma the tenant certainly cannot maintain such suit in the facts of the present case as he was not dispossessed of the suit property without his consent otherwise than in the due course of law. If tenant cannot maintain such suit against defendants, applying the principle of reverse engineering to the ratio of Sadashiv (supra), landlord too cannot maintain such suit against the defendants.

36. In the facts of the present case as pleaded by the plaintiff in the plaint, it is not the defendants but Mr Rajesh Sharma who dispossessed the plaintiff of his possession, if at all Rajesh Sharma was under obligation to hand over the possession to the plaintiff. It was Rajesh Sharma who committed the dispossession of the kind contemplated in the Section 6 of the SRA. Defendants at best can be said to be in connivance with Mr Rajesh Sharma and beneficiary. Plaintiff in his cross examination specifically admitted that he (plaintiff) was dispossessed by Rajesh Sharma and defendants. Plaintiff for reason best known to him has exonerated the conduct of Mr Rajesh Sharma and has let him go scott free. Plaintiff did not file any suit against Mr Rajesh Sharma nor impleaded him in the present suit.