no evidence- frivolous appeal and dragged the litigation

3. • Second Appeal Regular Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the CPC impugns the concurrent judgment of the Courts below of the Trial Court and of the First Appellate Court by which Civil Suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff has been decreed against the appellant/defendant with respect to property - The appellant/defendant has led no evidence and the respondent/plaintiff has proved the case by leading sufficient oral and documentary evidence which includes not only her admission about the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties but also the execution of the rent agreement in July, 2005 containing rate of rent to be Rs. 10,500/per month as well lack of cross-examination of PW1 on vital points, both the Courts below had rightly held that all the three ingredients required to be satisfied in a suit for possession were satisfied thus entitling the respondent/plaintiff to get a decree of possession as well damages from the appellant plaintiff - The appellant deliberately filed the frivolous appeal and dragged the litigation just to continue to remain in possession. It is seen that the present litigation is a clear case of abuse of process of law - Appeal stands dismissed

SHAILJA vs MUKESH RSA 379/16 09/01/17 [ RANI JJ ] [ DELHI HIGH COURT ]