B.N.Sapru, J. - (1.) This is a defendants appeal arising out of a suit for eviction.
(2.) The facts relevant for the decision of the appeal are that Nanhak Chand along with the respondents Nos. 16, 17 and 18 was owner of the land in suit. On 15-9-1972 Saiga executed a document which has been treated as a lease deed. It cannot be a lease as it was not registered and is signed by Saiga lessee. The kabuliat inter alia provides that Saiga had agreed to take the land on a fixed rent for carrying on a coal business. The document also provided that the lessee could make permanent constructions on the land. It was a further condition that Saiga would hand over the possession if the owners required the land for their own use on payment of price of the construction. There was also a provision to the following effect - "Kisi surat me vai ya rahan ya aar vagaraih na kar sakunga".
(3.) In other words it meant that Saiga undertook that he would neither sell, mortgage nor encumber (meaning to do any similar act) the property in any manner.;