KEDAR PANDEY AND ANR. Vs. RAM DIN KEWAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment under Sec. 202 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter called the Act). Briefly stated that facts of the case are as follows. One Ram Nandan Singh was the Sir-holder of the plots in suit. He died leaving his widow Smt. Ram Sahai Kunwar, as his heir. Smt. Ram Sahai Kunwar died in 1948 and thereafter Smt. Manakraji Kuer, sister of Ram Nandan Singh succeeded to his property. The plots in suit had been let out to the defendant by Smt. Ram Sahai Kunwar after the death of her husband. In 1955 Smt. Manakraji Kuer leased the plots in suit to the plaintiffs and by virtue of this lease they claimed the right to eject the defendant as an Asami. The defendant denied the claim of the plaintiffs and asserted that he was Sirdar of the plots in suit and was not, therefore, liable to ejectment.

(2.) The trial court decreed the suit but on appeal the learned Civil Judge reversed the decree of the trial court and dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs have appealed.

(3.) Originally the plaintiffs had alleged that they were Bhumidhars but, later, they abandoned that stand and claimed to be Sirdars. The trial court was of the view that as Smt. Manakraji Kuer was not a disable person in 1955 when the lease in favour of the plaintiffs was created, he plaintiffs became Sirdars under Sec. 165 of the Act. The learned Civil Judge, however, disagreed with this view on the ground that since the defendant was already in occupation of the land as an Asami it was not open to Smt. Manakraji Kuer to superimpose the plaintiffs and, therefore, the plaintiffs and, therefore, the plaintiffs did not acquire any interest at all under the lease in their favour. So far as the defendant is concerned there is no doubt that he is an Asami and the only question involved in this appeal is whether the plaintiffs are Sirdars.