JOTI RAM Vs. BHAGAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above two appeals have been placed before us and we are called upon to answer the following question :-

(2.) The facts so far as necessary for understanding the controversy may now be stated :

(3.) The defendants in their written statement denied the claim of the plaintiff, that he had ever been inducted as a tenant over the suit land or that he had remained in possession of the suit land as such. The defendants stated that they had 13 bighas 2 biswas of land in the village, out of which they sold 12 bighas 11 biswas of land to the plaintiff and others vide mutation Ex. DW2/A and kept the remaining 11 biswas of land in khasra No. 104 for the construction of Gurudwara or their houses. It was alleged that there had been no occasion for them to induct the plaintiff as a tenant ever the said small piece of land of 11 biswas (including the suit land), nor they had inducted him as tenant. In 1968-69, when the defendants came to the village, the suit land was lying vacant and they had raised the construction over it as owners and, therefore, the plaintiff had no cause of action. The defendants further pleaded that the plaintiff had filed an application under S. 62 of the Act before the Revenue Officer, but that application came to be dismissed and, therefore, he had no locus standi to file the suit for restoration of the possession as a tenant from the alleged defendants-landlords after the expiry of one year. Other objections with regard to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court and that the plaintiff was entitled to damages as claimed by him or if the suit was within the time, were also raised by the defendants.