BADALIYA Vs. RAMBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference by the First Bench presided over by Shri H. D. Ujjwal and the point for reference is : - "Whether possession of the predecessor in interest of a tenant should be considered to be the possession of the successor and heir for purposes of sec. 7 of the Rajasthan (Protection of Tenants) Ordinance, 1949.

(2.) IT has been argued before us that under the General Civil Law a plaintiff is always taken to include his successors in interest and the same is laid down in sec. 206 of the Succession Act. Therefore on analogy of the general law a tenant must be held to include his successor in interest under the Ordinance. IT is further urged that if a tenant who was in possession on 1.4.1948 dies and is succeeded by his son if the possession of the father is not considered to be that of his son he would not be able to claim reinstatement under the Ordinance and it would lead to ejectment of the successors of tenants who are equally entitled to protection.