VENKATA RAO Vs. BRIJPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in this appeal are the legal representatives of the first defendant. The plaintiffs filed O.S.91/1 of 1963 in the Court of the Munsiff at Aland claiming, declaration of ownership relating to the property as also claiming amount in deposit and for possession. The case of the plaintiffs' was that they are the owners of the suit property. It was their further case that defendant 1 surrendered his tenancy right long back but was attempting to interefere with the possession held by the plaintiffs." It was further stated that having regard to the illegal interference of the plaintiffs' possession, the proceedings were initiated before the Court of the Munsiff-Magistrate, Aland, and it was wrongly decided that defendant 1 was in possession of the lands in question and the lands were accordingly ordered to be released to him on the 27th August, 1957. The suit was therefore instituted for a declaration, for recovery of amount and also for mesne profits.

(2.) Defendant 1 filed the written statement. Amongst other contentions, it was submitted by him that the rights of protected tenancy in the land was not surrendered and further in pursuance of such surrender possession was not obtained under the provisions of S.32 of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. It was further stated that it is wrong to say defendant 1 has no right in respect of land in dispute and that the alleged surrender is not a genuine one. Further defendant 1 has stated the following in his written statement:

(3.) The correctness of this decree was challenged before the learned Addl. Civil Judge, Gulbarga, in R.A.171/4/1966. By the judgment dated 30th June 1969, the learned Appellate Judge has confirmed the decision of the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. The legal representatives of defendant 1 have preferred this second appeal.