BHAGTU Vs. MELU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHAGTU plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction, inter alia, pleading that he was in possession of the suit land on one-half batai and earlier to him the same was in possession of one Indraj. It was alleged that the defendant purchased the suit land from Sunehari through a registered sale deed dated 12. 10. 1981. The plaintiff in order to establish his possession further alleged that Sunehari challenged the sale by filling a suit on the ground that the same did not affect her right and the sale was null and void. Though the suit was dismissed yet it had been found therein that Indraj used to cultivate the suit land Since the defendants were out to dispossess the plaintiff forcibly from the suit land in view of the sale deed dated 12. 10. 1981, the present suit for permanent injunction was filed.

(2.) DEFENDANTS contested the suit and admitted that the plaintiff was in possession of the suit land. Status of the plaintiff as tenant was denied and it was stated that he was in possession of the land in his capacity as licensee. The defendants further pleaded that after purchase of the land the licence of the plaintiff was revoked and he was in unauthorised possession. The defendants further made counter-claim in the written statement and prayed that a decree for mesne profits for use and occupation of the land as also for possession be passed in their favour.

(3.) THE pleadings of the parties gave rise to the following issues: