M.N. Bhandari, J. - (1.) By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order of Additional Collector, Revenue Appellate Authority and Board of Revenue. All the three orders are against the petitioners and having concurrent finding of facts. It was on a suit preferred by the respondents to seek declaration under Section 19 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (in short "Act, 1955").
(2.) Learned counsel submits that the petitioners were khatedar of the land and their names exist in the revenue record. The respondents filed a suit claiming themselves to be khatedar and possession of the land in dispute. It was nowhere mentioned that they are shikmi tenant in the land thus entitled to the benefit under the Act, 1955. The courts below failed to consider that in absence of claim to cover it under Section 19 of the Act, 1955, the declaration could not have been made. The plea taken by the petitioners was even in contradiction inasmuch as they were claiming rights as shikmi tenant and at the same time, claim was made based on permissive possession. A claim for adverse possession is in contrast to the declaration sought under Section 19 by considering themselves to be shikmi tenant. The aforesaid was also ignored by the court below.
(3.) Lastly, it is contended that no evidence was led by the respondents to show as to how they became shikmi tenant. In absence of it, the court should have taken cognizance of the revenue record where names of petitioners exist. It is apart from the fact that even as per statement of the respondents, they came in the possession somewhere in the year 1961, whereas to seek benefit under Section 19 of the Act, 1955, the possession should have been prior to the year 1955.;