CHUHARI Vs. SIRTU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been placed before us pursuant to the order made by S. N. Shankar J on lbth October 1967 and we are called upon to answer the following question.-

(2.) The facts so far as necessary for understanding the controvensy may now be stated. Bhutu, the husband of Smt.Balesru, was a non-occupancy tenant of the land in question. Defendant No 1Shri Chubaru was the owner landlord of the said land. When Bhuta was ejected from his tenancy, he applied to the Assistant Collector First Grade, for the restoration of possession of the tenancy under the Himachal Pradesh Tenants Rights and Restoration) Act which application was allowed on 31st July, 1954. In pursuance of the orders of the Assistant Collector First Grade, Bhutu was put back in possession of the land on 9th September 1954, but three days thereafter, he was again dispossess by defendant No. 1. Bhutu again applied for the execution of the order dated 31st July, 1954 and was again put in possession on 13th January, 1956, but it appears that later the Assistant Collector First Grade held that second execution was not according to law because the order having once been executed, the same could not be executed second time. It was in these circumstances that Bhutu's widow Smt. Balesru instituted the suit out of which the present second appeal has arisen.

(3.) The defendants denied that Bhutu was the tenant of the land in suit or that he was ever put into possession of the said land. It was further denied that the defendants were in illegal possession thereof. In fact, they pleaded that Bhutu had voluntarily given up cultivation of the land in question and the defendants were, in the circumstances, in lawful possession thereof. Several preliminary objections were also taken, including the objection questioning the jurisdiction of the civil Courts to try the suit Indeed it is this objection which falls for adjudication by us.