1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD SECOND APPEAL NO. 757 OF 2007 Vishwanath Tathu Chaudhari .. APPELLANT VERSUS Vasudeo Joshi Samaj Seva Sangh Trust & others .. RESPONDENTS Shri G.V. Wani, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Girish Rane, Advocate for respondent nos. 1, 3, 7, 8, 11 and 12. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 8 th September, 2009 PER COURT : 1 This is an appeal by original defendant raising exception to the concurrent judgments recorded by the courts below. 2 Respondents / original plaintiffs instituted Regular Civil Suit no. 453/1990 claiming possession of the encroached area alleged to be in possession of the defendant / appellant herein. According to the plaintiffs, the suit premises belongs to the defendants as the trespasser. He was issued a notice calling upon him to vacate the premises. However, he has failed to 2 do so. 3 Defendant resisted the claim by filing written statement. According to him, he has been inducted as tenant by one of the trustees Rashmabai. Defendant placed on record certain receipts alleged to have been executed by said Rashmabai. Thus, it is the contention of the defendant that he is the tenant inducted lawfully in the premises and he is occupying the same. Defendant thus prays for dismissal of the suit. 4 After considering the rival contentions trial court came to the conclusion that the defendant is occupying the premises illegally and he has not established his induction over the premises in his capacity as a tenant. Trial court thus granted decree as prayed for by the plaintiff. Judgment and decree passed by the trial court was subjected to appeal at the instance of defendant in Regular Civil Appeal no. 102/1993 which came to be heard and disposed of by the Additional District Judge, Jalgaon who was pleased to dismiss the same by judgment dt. 20-10-1997. 5 I have perused the judgments recorded by both the courts below and heard arguments advanced by learned counsel for the respective parties. 3 The courts below have recorded concurrent findings of fact that the induction of appellant / original defendant over the suit premises is not in his capacity as tenant and the occupation of the defendant in respect of the suit premises is that of a trespasser. Findings of fact recorded by the courts below need not be interfered with in exercise of powers under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 6 It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that his client is in possession of the suit premises since many years and some time may be granted for him to make alternate arrangement. Considering the contentions raised by the appellant, I deem it appropriate to grant six months time to the appellant / defendant to vacate the suit premises. Appellant shall vacate the premises on expiration of period of six months from today. Appellant shall furnish an undertaking to the court within 8 weeks from today to the effect that he shall not create third party interest and will keep the premises in habitable state and vacate the premises on expiration of period as stated above.. In the event of failure to furnish the undertaking as stated above, interim protection granted by virtue of this order shall stand withdrawn. Appeal stands dismissed summarily. 4 7 In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending civil application, if any, stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/sa757.07.odt