B GULZAR SINGH Vs. JANKI KUNWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are plaintiffs' appeals, each arising out of a particular appeal in the lower appellate Court and in the same suit by the same plaintiffs.

(2.) The suit was for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over certain sir plots. There was also a prayer for possession in the alternative. The original sir holders were one Ranjit Singh and one Sarju Prasad. The plaintiffs are the successors in interest of the former and the defendant is the successor-in-interest of the latter. In 1889, Ranjit Singh, predecessor-in-title of the plaintiffs, filed a suit against the other co-sharer, Sarju Prasad, for possession over the plots held by the latter. That suit was compromised on 29-11-1890. Therein it was settled that each party would remain in possession of the plots in his exclusive occupation and that he would be entitled to have a formal partition of the patti, meaning mahal, according to their respective possessions. For all intents and purposes each party was recognised to be the exclusive owner of the sir plots and allowed to remain in possession of the same. On this point there is no dispute now between the parties.

(3.) In 1910, Ranjit Singh's widow sold the plots allotted to him together with his proprietary share in the village to the plaintiffs. The widow admittedly did not claim any ex-proprietary rights in those plots, but allowed the plaintiffs to obtain possession over them. This possession appears to have continued upto 1944, in which year the defendant filed a suit against the tenants of the plaintiffs for arrears of rent. This suit was decreed. I may incidentally mention that there is a finding in this case by the lower appellate Court that the plaintiffs are, in fact, still in possession.