RAJA RAM Vs. SHEO BEHARI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's special appeal from the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court. The facts may be briefly stated as follows:

(2.) Hanwant Singh, plaintiff, who died during the pendency of the appeal before the learned single Judge and is now represented by his son, Sheo Behari Singh and his grandson Maheshar Baksh Singh, was cosharer in patti No. 2 in village Kathwa in which grove plot No. 67 was situated. Ram Ghulam the maternal grandfather of Raja Ram, appellant, was its groveholder. The plaintiff's case was that Ram Ghulam died in 1934 and was succeeded by defendant-appellant who used to live with him, that in 1937 Raja Ram abandoned the grove and went away to live in village Shivpuri which was not owned by the Zemindars and according to the village custom the grove escheated to the zemindars including the plaintiff. On these allegations the plaintiff claimed to recover possession from Raja Ram who was alleged to be a trespasser.

(3.) Raja Ram's defence was that he had inherited the grove from his maternal grandfather who died not in 1934 but in 1930, that he never lived with his maternal grandfather and that the cause of action, if any, arose in 1930, on the death of Ram Ghulam and as the suit was filed in 1944, it was time barred. The custom pleaded by the plaintiff was also denied and it was further urged that any such custom had no effect in view of the provisions of Section 206(a), U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939.