AZIZ UDDIN Vs. LAXMI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the CPC) against the judgment and decree of the trial court rejecting the plaint under Order VII, Rule 11 of the CPC.

(2.) The plaintiff filed a suit alleging that one Pandit Kalyan Das was the zamindar/owner of a non-zamindari land bearing khasra no.460 having an area of 10 Bighas, 6 Biswas in village Sarjepur now known as Civil Lines in district Agra. Upon the death of Pandit Kalyan Das, the ownership devolved upon his three sons Basant Lal, Amar Nath and Basant Lal in equal shares. It was alleged that Basant Lal died living behind his sons proforma defendant nos.29 and 30. It was contended that Amar Nath and Basant Lal transferred their rights, title and interest in the land in question by two registered transfer deeds dated 1st June, 1984 in favour of the plaintiff and, since then, the plaintiff is the owner and in possession of the land in suit along with defendant nos.29 and 30. It was also alleged that the name of the plaintiff was also mutated in the revenue records. In paragraph 6 of the plaint it was contended that at one point of time the land in question was occupied by one Munni Lal as occupant of Ziman-13 (sayar) under the U.P. Land Record Manual on a rent of Rs.14, 1 Anna and 10 pie per annum. It was further contended that Munni Lal had died and that defendant nos.1 to 5 are their heirs, who are now in possession of the land in suit as occupants. In paragraph 8 of the plaint it was alleged that Munni Lal had no transferable rights in the land in question nor had any right to change the nature of the land and that during the pendency of Suit No.765 of 1986 filed by the appellant against Raj Narayan Sarin and others before the court of Munsif, Agra it came to the knowledge of the plaintiff for the first time that Munni Lal had executed a registered transfer deed dated 14th December, 1940 transferring the land in question to Late Raj Narayan Sarin, father of the defendants second set, alleging therein to be in possession of the land in suit as a permanent tenant. The plaintiff further contended in paragraph 8 that the assertion made in the transfer deed with regard to being a permanent tenant was absolutely false, inasmuch as Munni Lal had no transferable right and that the transfer deed dated 14th December, 1940 did not confer any right, title or interest in the land in suit and that it was a void document.

(3.) In paragraph 9, it was alleged that Late Raj Narayan Sarin and the defendants' second set had transferred parcels of land in question to the defendants third set by means of various transfer deeds and that these transfer deeds are without any authority of law, illegal and are null and void. In paragraph 10, it was alleged that the defendants second and third set have raised unauthorized construction on the land in question and that they have no right to retain possession or raise construction. In paragraph 12, the plaintiff alleged that he had requested the defendants not to raise any construction and surrender its possession to the plaintiff after removal of the construction. In paragraph 14, the plaintiff alleged that the defendants have no right to retain their possession. In paragraph 15, the plaintiff contended that he is entitled to possession of the land by dispossession of defendants first, second and third set and that the plaintiff was entitled to Rs.42.53 paise as Sayar from the defendants first set for the last three years up to the date of the suit and that the plaintiff was further entitled for possession for use and occupation pendentilite and future at the rate of Rs.5000/- per day from the defendant nos.1 to 27. In paragraph 16, the plaintiff alleged that the cause of action arose at Agra lastly on or about 12th December, 2000 when the defendants first, second and third set refused to surrender possession. Accordingly, the plaintiff prayed for the following reliefs:-