V.P.GUPTA,J. - (1.)THIS is a landlords' appeal against the judgment of the District Judge, dated 27th December, 1969, by which the learned District Judge allowed the application of the tenant (respondent) for acquisition of proprietary rights on payment of Rs. 693 12 as compensation under the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 (hereinafter called the Himachal Pradesh Act of 1953).
(2.)THE brief facts are that Wazira respondent filed an application under Section 11 of the Himachal Pradesh Act of 1953 on 14th August, 1959 for grant of proprietary rights in land measuring 74 bighas 11 biswas situate in village Kandela, Tehsil Saddar, District Bilaspur, which was the ownership of the present appellants,
This application was contested by the appellants and it was alleged that a notice of ejectment under Section 45 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 (hereinafter called the Punjab Act) had been issued to the respondent on 27th September, 1949. The respondent contested this notice of ejectment and filed a suit in the court of Revenue Assistant, Bilaspur, which suit was dismissed on 2nd September, 1953. An appeal filed by the respondent was also dismissed by the Collector on 3rd December, 1953. It was also alleged that an execution petition was filed by the appellants in 1958 seeking possession of the disputed property but the proceedings in that execution petition were stayed on the objections of the respondent and for this reason the execution petition was also consigned to the record room on 18th June, 1958. The respondent's claim to acquire proprietary rights was denied.

(3.)ON these pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed on different dales: Issues on 21 4 1961:
"1. Whether there is no relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties? O. P. R. 2. Relief. Issues on 19 9 1964: "1. Whether the H. P. Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 is contrary to Law and is be yond the powers of the Parliament? O. P. R. 2. Whether the provisions of H. P. Abolition Act, 1953 have not been applied to Bilaspur properly? O. P. R. 3. Whether this application on account of the previous decision in various cases relating to this dispute is not liable to be heard? O. P. R. Issues in July, 1968: "1 (a) Whether there are buildings be longing to the respondents on the suit land, if so, how much compensation they are liable to be paid? O. P. R. 2 (a) Whether there has been a decree for ejectment against the applicant and if so how it affects this case? O. P. R. 3 (a) Relief.

;