RUDAN Vs. UJAGAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON 2-11-1946, Th. Ujagar Singh and Shrimati Jagrani, his wife, instituted the suit out of which this appeal arises under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act against Rudan Chamar alleging that they were in possession of the land of which they were the owners and that Rudan had wrongfully dispossessed them on 10-7-1946. They claimed possession by reason of this dispossession within Six months under Section 9, Specific Relief Act.

(2.) THE defence was that the plaintiffs had never been in possession and that the defendant had all along been in possession as a tenant. It was also alleged that the plaintiffs alone were not the owners, but that other co-sharers were also owners and so the suit did not lie.

(3.) THE trial court upheld the pleas of the plaintiffs and found that they had been in possession and had been dispossessed within six months of the institution of the suit. One of the pleas taken before the court was that the civil court had no jurisdiction. The learned Munsif found that the suit fell within his jurisdiction since it was one under Section 9, Specific Relief Act.