UMRAO SMGH Vs. MAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal from the Judgment and decree of the learned Additional Senior Subordinate Judge II affirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court raises an interesting but difficult question of law. The appellant was defendant in a suit for possession brought against him by the respondents in respect of 17 bighas 8 biswas of land situate in village Barwala within the Union Territory of Delhi on the allegations that the respondents had purchased the land on 21st February, 1962 from one Ranjit Singh who in turn bad been allotted the same by the Managing Officer appointed under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and that the aprellant was in un-authorised occupation of the said land.

(2.) The suit was resisted by the appellant who pleaded that the Civil courts had no jurisdiction to try such a suit and that he was in lawful possession of the land. The validity of the sale in favour of Ranjit Singh and conseqaently in favour of the respondents was also challenged on the ground that Ranjit Singh was a "Bhumidhar" and as such the sale contravened the provisions of Section 88 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 and the East Punlab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 The parties went to trial on the following issues: -

(3.) The trial court found all the issues in favour of the reapondents and against the appellant. It was held that the Civil courts had jurisdiction to entertain the suit. It was also held that the respondents were owners of the suit land, that the sale in their favour was not void and that the appellant had failed to prove that he was in lawful possession of the same. The appeal court affirmed the decision of the trial court dismissing the appeal with costs.