L.N. MITTAL - (1.) CM No. 13542-C of 2011 Application is allowed as prayed for. RSA No. 4652 of 2011
(2.) PLAINTIFFS Balbir Singh etc. (including legal representatives of plaintiff No. 2-Amar Chand since deceased) have filed this second appeal, having been non-suited by both the Courts below. Plaintiffs-appellants alleged that they along with profroma defendants No. 3 to 5 (respondents No. 8 to 10 herein) have become owners in possession of the suit land measuring 6 kanals 19 marlas because they and their predecessors have been in possession thereof for more than 50 years on payment of nominal rent. They reclaimed the suit land which was barren and un-fertile and made it cultivable. Predecessors of defendant No. 2 Pehlad (since deceased and represented by respondents No. 2 to 7 herein) gave the suit land to the predecessors of plaintiffs and proforma defendants, with promise never to eject. The plaintiffs thus claimed that they and proforma defendants acquired occupancy rights in the suit land and, therefore, became owners thereof.
(3.) ONLY the legal heirs of defendant No. 2 contested the suit. They pleaded that they are owners as well as in possession of the suit land. Plaintiffs and proforma defendants or their predecessors have never cultivated it. Earlier, Pehlad-defendant No. 2 was owner in possession of the suit land and after his death, his heirs are cultivating it. Plaintiffs have no concern with the suit land. It was also pleaded that the suit land was wrongly declared surplus by Prescribed Authority. The contesting defendants have already made application for exempting it from surplus area. Various other pleas have also been raised.;