MANGROO SARJUAND Vs. RAM SUMER RAM SAMUJH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) Originally Shiv Raj was tenure holder of the agricultural land in dispute and on his death his son Ram Samujh inherited the land. Respondent No. 1 Ram Sumer is son of Ram Samujh. In the revenue records of 1331 fasli (1923-24 A.D) names of Parag, Jhakari and Bali Karan were recorded as tenants and name of Ram Samujh was recorded as Farar (i.e a person who has abandoned the land). After about 10 years in the revenue records the names of Sarju, Ram Din, Bhullan and Ram Narain were recorded as tenure holders. After some time along with the said four persons the name of Ram Samujh was also recorded in the revenue records as co-tenure holder and all the five persons were shown to be the co-tenants to the extent of 1/5 share each. This position continued even after Zamindari Abolition and till the basic year.

(3.) After start of consolidation proceedings Ram Sumer respondent No. 1 son of Ram Samujh filed objections claiming exclusive right in the property in dispute. He asserted that in 1331 fasli status of his father was wrongly shown as Farari (abandonment) and the names of Parag, Jhakari and Bali Karan were wrongly recorded as tenants. He further contended that after 10 years the names of Sarju, Ram Din, Bhullan and Ram Narain were also recorded wrongly. (Petitioners are successors in interest of these four persons apart from Bhullan who was himself petitioner No. 2 in the second writ petition).