The appellants, property owners, were alleged to have unlawfully evicted the respondent, who filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The Trial Court and the High Court ruled in favor of the respondent, dismissing the appellants' plea regarding voluntary handover of possession and maintainability of the suit. The appellate court found no merit in the appellants' appeal and dismissed it, affirming the concurrent findings.

1. Timeline of Orders (Para 1):

• The court reserved its orders on 18.01.2024, allowing parties to settle the matter within two weeks.
• No application was filed within the given period, and thus, the court proceeded to decide on the merits.

2. Ownership and Eviction Allegations (Para 2):

• The appellants are owners of the disputed property, which was given to the respondent under a leave and licence agreement.
• The respondent alleged that the appellants unlawfully and forcefully evicted them.
• Within six months, the respondent filed a suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, seeking possession.

3. Trial Court Decision (Para 2):

• The Trial Court ruled in favor of the respondent, disbelieving the appellants' argument of voluntary handover of possession.
• The court relied on a possession receipt and rejected the appellants' plea that the suit was not maintainable under Section 6 of the Act.

4. High Court Revision and Findings (Para 3):

• The appellants filed a revision before the High Court, which was dismissed.
• The High Court found no merit in the appellants' argument regarding the maintainability of the suit.
• The High Court concurred with the Trial Court's findings regarding the illegal dispossession of the respondent.

5. Appeal Dismissal by the Appellate Court (Para 4):

• The appellate court found no merit in the appeal, noting that the findings of both the Trial Court and High Court were based on evidence.
• The appeal was dismissed.

6. Disposition of Pending Applications (Para 5):

• Any pending applications were disposed of along with the dismissal of the appeal.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Specific Relief Act, 1963:
  • Section 6: Deals with suits for recovery of possession in cases of illegal dispossession without going into the title of the property.

Ratio Decidendi:

• Maintainability under Section 6: The courts reaffirmed that a suit under Section 6 is maintainable to protect a party dispossessed of property, regardless of ownership disputes.
• Concurrent Findings: The Trial Court and High Court's findings on illegal dispossession were factual and supported by evidence, leaving no scope for interference by the appellate court.

Subjects:

Property Dispute, Illegal Dispossession, Leave and Licence Agreement.

Property Law, Specific Relief Act, Illegal Eviction, Concurrent Findings, Appellate Review, Section 6, Possession