1 WP 6946/2008 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6946 OF 2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. Balasaheb Deshmukh for the petitioners. Mr. Ajay A. Joshi for the respondents. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J DATE : 1ST AUGUST 2011 P.C. : 1. By an order dated 4th September 2008, the trial Judge framed additional issues, one of which is: Whether the plaintiff is a tenant in the suit land? The order framing issue is impugned in this petition. 2. Counsel for the petitioners 2 WP 6946/2008 submitted that the pleading regarding tenancy was inadequate and insufficient to raise an issue of tenancy and on the basis of such inadequate pleading the issue ought to have been framed. 3. In paragraph 2 of the plaint, the plaintiffs have specifically pleaded that the plaintiffs' fore-fathers were in occupation of the suit property as tenants and that they were regularly paying the rent. They have also stated that thereafter the plaintiffs have been paying the rent to the landlord. Thus there is a clear pleading of tenancy. It is true that the respondents (plaintiffs) have not mentioned the date of commencement of the tenancy, but that may be because of the fact that their ancestors were the original tenants and the respondents were claiming inherited tenancy. As such, they may not be aware as to the exact date or time of 3 WP 6946/2008 origin of the tenancy and could not have pleaded about the date of commencement of the tenancy. Merely on the ground of failure to plead the date of commencement of the tenancy, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be held that the pleading of tenancy was inadequate to frame the issue of tenancy. There is no merit in the petition which is hereby rejected. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)