ROOP NARAIN Vs. HANUMAN PERSHAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is 9 second appeal by a plaintiff Roop Narain whose suit for a declaration that he is the owner of the house in suit by virtue of adverse possession for about 50 years has failed in the trial Court and in the lower appellate Court.

(2.) IT Is not in dispute that the plaintiff has been In possession of the property in suit since at least 193z. The contesting defendant Hanuman Parshad alleged that he had let the property in suit in 1932 to the other defendant, Bishan Chand, who is related to Roop Narain and that the plaintiff had been occupying the house with the permission of Bishan Chand. In 1941 Hanuman Parshad brought a suit in the Small Cause Court for the recovery of Rs. 180/- as arrears of rent at Rs. 10/p. m. against both Bishan Chand and Roop Narain, the latter being impleaded as a party on the ground that he had been let into possession of the property by the tenant. Both the defendants contested the suit, Bishan Chand denying the existence of the relationship of landlord and tenant between him and Hanuman Parshad, while Roop Narain claimed that he had been in adverse possession of the property for a long time, and that neither Hanuman Parshad nor Bishan Chand had anything to do with the house. The suit was dismissed on the 7th of May, 1942, but Hanuman Parshad filed a revision petition in the High Court at Lahore which was decided on the 15th of May, 1943, by Monroe, J. The judgment is very brief and by it Hanuman Parshad was given a decree for Rs. 180/- against Bishan Chand, Roop Narain being held not to be liable to pay any rent as being an occupier of the premises by permission of Bishan Chand.

(3.) THEREAFTER, according to Hanuman Parshad, he continued realising the rent of the premises from Bishan Chand until finally in 1953 he filed a suit for ejectment on the ground of non-payment of rent and obtained a decree on the 15th of December, 1953. It was in execution of this decree that Hanuman Parshad sought to eject Roop Narain who set up his adverse title and then instituted the suit which has given rise to this appeal for a declaration of ownership on the basis of adverse possession, and also for an injunction restraining Hanuman Parshad from ejecting him in pursuance of his decree against Bishan Chand,