MOHAN LAL Vs. BANWARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision under Sec. 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act is directed against the trial court's judgment dated 4-3-1982, decreeing the plaintiff's suit for ejectment of the defendant from the accommodation in dispute. Feeling aggrieved, the tenant has come up in the instant revision and in support thereof, I have heard Sri S. N. Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant in revision.

(2.) LEARNED counsel raised several contentions before me. Firstly, it was contended that the court below was wrong in holding that the Civil Court had jurisdiction to try the suit. According to the learned counsel issue no. 6, which was as follows, was wrongly decided by the trial court. "Whether the house in dispute was constructed over Bhumidhari land ? If so, have the rights or the plaintiff in the disputed house, if any been extinguished under the provisions of KUZA Act ?"

(3.) AS a second limb of the same argument, the learned counsel contended that the rights of the plaintiff in the land became extinguished and for this purpose he placed reliance on Sections 189 and 190 of the UP ZA & LR Act. In my view, both these sections are not applicable because the clear finding is that when the Kamaun and Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1960 was enforced the site of the house was no more land in which rights could accrue under the said enactment.