DINDYAL Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In present case, original respondent - 3 has filed 5 suits bearing Suit Nos. 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of 1954 under Sec. 175 of U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939. Suits were directed against different defendants and in regard to different plots. According to plaintiffs, they were sir-holders of plots whereas defendants were their sub-tenants and they were liable for ejectment.

(2.) Later on, on 29/9/1956, plaintiffs applied for amendment of pleadings, which was allowed that they were occupancy tenants of land in dispute since it was given to their ancestors as a grant. The defendants of all suits contested that they are not sub-tenants of plaintiffs and have acquired hereditary rights and suits are barred by limitation. They have challenged the plaintiff's title also. In the suit, following 6 issues were framed :-

(3.) Trial Court vide order dtd. 30/9/1958, dismissed the Suit No. 18 and 21. Suit Nos. 19 and 20 were decreed in part and Suit No. 22 was decreed in its entirety.