- (1.) THIS is a defendants' third appeal. It arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for possession of a plot appertaining to Ahata No. 957 situate in Mohalla Kashif Ali Sarai in the town of Unnao. The plaintiff brought the suit on the allegations that he was the owner of the plot in question, that dhani Ram. defendant No. 3 was his 'riaya', that the house occupied by Dhani Ram fell into ruins about ten years prior to the suit, that the 'arazi' thereafter became 'parti' and the house was abandoned by Dhani Ram. It was further alleged by the plaintiff that subsequently on 29-3-1945, he had given permission to defendant No. 4 Tara Prasad to put up constructions on the said plot, that Tara Prasad started the work of putting up constructions, that he was resisted by defendants nos. 1 and 2 on 31-3-1945, who alleged that Dhani Ram was their uncle and they were constructing their own house on the said plot. The unlawful resistance by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 gave rise to the plaintiff's suit for possession. Dhani Ram, the previous tenant was impleaded as defendant No. 3 in the suit.
(2.) A joint written statement was filed on behalf of defendants 1 to 3. In this written statement all the defendants alleged that the house had throughout remained in the possession of Dhani Ram defendant No. 3, that it had fallen down about two years prior to the suit, that all the defendants had started constructing a house on the said site, that the site had never become 'parti' and that for the aforesaid reasons the plaintiff's suit was liable to be dismissed. Defendant No. 4 did not contest the suit.
(3.) ON the basis of the above pleadings, the trial Court framed the following three issues ins the case: 1. Did the plot escheat to the landlord because the house of Dhani Ram fell into ruins? 2. Is the plaintiff the landlord of the plot? 3. To what relief is the plaintiff entitled?;