JHARI LAL Vs. MANGLA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals preferred by appellant Jhari Lal stem from a composite judgment dated 21.10.1996, delivered by lower appellate court in Civil Appeal Nos. 358 of 1986 and 359 of 1986 whereby Suit No. 327 of 1983 instituted by Jhari Lal was dismissed while Suit No. 160 of 1984 preferred by Smt. Ram Bala Devi was decreed.

(2.) The dispute centers round the land No. 59 situated in Mohalla Lallapur within the periphery of city Varanasi. Jhari Lal and Ganga Ram instituted Suit No. 326 of 1983 arraying Mangal Singh as defendant No. 1 and Smt. Ram Bala Devi as defendant No. 2 besides two other persons as defendant Nos. 3 and 4 with the allegations that the land in question admeasuring 120 x 80 was tenanted to them about three years back at the rate of Rs. 80 per month which was utilized by them for carrying on the vocation of keeping their cattle and selling milk. They alleged that though they regularly paid the agreed rent but no receipt was issued against payment of rent. It was further alleged that on 28.4.1983, the defendants attempted forcible eviction of the plaintiff's from the land in question and therefore, suit aforestated was necessitated in which relief claimed was to issue injunction restraining the defendants from illegally evicting them from the land in question. On the other hand, the case set out by the defendant Smt. Ram Bala Devi in written statement was that the land in question was rented out to the plaintiff for six months between the period 2.11.1982 and 30.4.1983 and thereafter on 30.4.1983, he vacated the land in question on their own and delivered vacant possession to defendant No. 1 who had been authorised by her by power of attorney to deal with on her behalf and also executed a note of delivery of possession paper No. 13 Ka. It was further averred that after a week or so, the plaintiffs again approached and solicited the defendant to rent out one biswa land together with tin-shed etc. and agreed to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 96 per day and in this connection, agreement was prepared on which Jhari Lal affixed his thumb impression. It is further averred that subsequently, owing to disinclination of the plaintiff, the agreement aborted ostensibly on the ground that the rate of rent fixed therein was too excessive and thereafter, the plaintiff entered into forcible possession over the land under a design on 15.6.1983. It is also averred that prior to it, the plaintiff had instituted a suit and obtained injunction order behind the back of the defendant. It is further averred that on 8.6.1983, Mangal Singh defendant No. 1 came to know of illegal occupation of the plaintiff after he arrived from Ghazipur to Varanasi and on being questioned, he flourished injunction order to the defendant No. 1.

(3.) It would further appear from the record that Smt. Ram Bala Devi thereafter instituted Suit No. 160 of 1984 for the relief of evicting Jhari Lal from the land in question and of restoring possession to her in relation to land 59/1 to 59/3 together with tin-shed and incomplete construction thereon from the illegal occupation of Jhari Lal.