MAM CHAND Vs. MANDIR RADHA KRISHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Cm No. 4461-C of 2012

(2.) Defendant has no right, title or interest in the suit land. Defendant is neither owner nor in possession thereof, but the defendant has been wrongly recorded in the revenue record. Accordingly the plaintiff sought declaration that plaintiffs have become owners of the suit land in view of the Proprietary Rights Act, having acquired occupancy rights and accordingly plaintiffs are entitled to get it recorded as such in the revenue record in place of defendant. Permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in plaintiffs' possession over the suit land was also claimed. Defendant resisted the suit and broadly controverted the plaint averments. It was pleaded that the suit land was given to plaintiffs for cultivation on 1/3rd batai. Defendant had also filed eviction suit against the plaintiffs in revenue Court. It was pleaded that plaintiffs are still tenants over the suit land and they have not acquired occupancy rights therein nor they have become owners of the suit land because plaintiffs are gair morusi tenants. It was denied that plaintiffs are in possession of the suit land for the last three generations. Plaintiffs have been paying 1/3rd batai to the defendants. Various other pleas were also raised.

(3.) Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rewari vide judgment and decree dated 01.09.2009 dismissed the plaintiffs' suit. First appeal preferred by plaintiffs has been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Rewari vide judgment and decree dated 25.11.2011. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiffs have filed this second appeal.