SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of two Regular Second Appeals bearing Nos. 2103 and 2102 of 1982.
(2.) IN both these appeals, the dispute is about 12 kanals 13 marlas of land situated in the revenue estate of village Lakhnaula, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, which was originally owned by 'Shamilat Patti Jai Ram.' Regarding this land, a 'Dohli' was created long back by the members of the said Patti in favour of Mool Chand and Roshan Lal, in lieu of the services to be rendered as Prohit by them to the land owners. In October, 1960, the aforesaid Mool Chand and Roshan Lal, who were in possession of the land as Dohlidars, leased out the land in question to Khushi Ram (father of Ram Narain and Guru Dev) vide an agreement/lease deed for 30 years. Thereafter, he cultivated the land as lessee, and after the death of Khushi Ram', his sons Ram Narain and Guru Dev cultivated the land. In the year 1978, Sheo Nath and others (appellants herein) took forcible possession of the said land claiming themselves to be owners of the suit land. Thereupon, Ram Narain and Guru Dev sons of Khushi Ram filed civil suit No. 196 dated 12.10.1978 for possession of the suit land and for recovery of Rs. 1,000/- on account of compensation. The said suit was contested by the appellants on the ground that the 'Dohli' tenure created by their forefathers automatically came to an end, when the Dohlidars ceased to render services to the owner of the land. It was further alleged that they resumed possession of the suit land about 40 years ago, after the Dohlidars left the village and since then, they are in its continuing possession. It was further pleaded that Dohlidars had no right to give suit land on lease to the plaintiffs and the alleged lease deed for 30 years is illegal and void as the same amounts to permanent alienation, and Dohlidars have no right to permanently alienate the 'Dohli' land.
(3.) THE said suit was decreed by the trial Court. It was held that the 'Dohli' tenure never comes to an end. Dohlidars were within their right to lease out the 'Dholi' land. The lease deed executed by the Dohlidars was not illegal and void and the same can not be termed as permanent alienation. It was further held that the plaintiffs have dispossessed the defendants-lessees on 7.7.1978 illegally and without any right by causing loss to the lessees of the Dohlidars.;