suit, the object, of the landlord is to eject the sub-
lessee from the land in execution of the decree and such
an object
this
proceeding that the suit and the execution proceedings for
ejectment and taking over the possession is only with
regard to the first floor ... filed a suit for ejectment against the tenants claimed to be
of the plaintiffs and got them evicted in the execution
proceedings and these events
implead herself in the Execution proceedings.
She filed an ejectment suit against one Muruga and it was
decreed ex parte on 23.01.2019. She dragged Execution ... Affidavit, first appellant has stated that one Muruga
was their tenant, an ejectment suit was filed against him
and the same was decreed. First appellant
1979 for ejection of
the original judgment debtor. The suit came to be
compromised on 6.3.1980. The respondent initiated
execution proceedings in Execution case ... filed for ejection of the original judgment debtor
and consent decree has been passed. The judgment debtor
has not delivered possession. Therefore, execution
proceedings have
tenant.
In fact by filing suit for ejectment against his brother-in-law
in execution of the said decree, he had been thrown
Chhutan for recovery of rent and ejectment from the premises which was decreed and the execution proceeding No. 331 of 1951 ensured. Since the Amin
2013 against
respondents no.6 to 10 for relief of ejectment. It was
alleged that subject matter of said suit included portion of
petition property ... guise of ejecting tenant, plaintiff in Small Cause Suit
no.39/2013 was trying to take possession of property and
thereby frustrate Execution Petition filed
1999 against defendant Nos.2, 3 and 4
for ejectment and delivery of possession of suit schedule
property. On 23.06.2000, the Trial Court decreed ... partnership firm and also its partners, for
ejectment. Since the suit was decreed on 23.06.2000, the
execution petitions were filed
plaintiff to terminate the lease
and sue for ejectment. The defendants though admitted the
execution of the lease agreement has contended that the
plaintiff ... that
they were not even remotely necessary for considering the suit
for ejectment. The plaintiff accused the defendant No.1 of
indulging in certain acts
comply
with the notice demand. The respondents therefore filed a suit
to eject the petitioner from the suit property.
3. The petitioner contested the suit ... rent and therefore, the suit was not
maintainable for ejectment. He also disputed the execution of
the Will in favour of the respondents and claimed