BAHADUR Vs. MOHINDER KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Regular Second Appeal in the States of Punjab and Haryana and Union Territory, Chandigarh is governed by Sec. 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918 and not by Sec. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as held by a five Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Pankajakshi (Dead) through LRs v. Chandrika and Others (2016) 6 SCC 157.

(2.) In this regular second appeal, the defendants assail the correctness of the judgment passed by the First Appellate Court, which, in turn, has reversed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. In order to comprehend the issue involved in the present case, the relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.

(3.) On 8/8/1986, the respondents (plaintiffs) filed a suit for grant of decree of declaration that they are the owners in possession of the agricultural land measuring 57 kanals 7 marlas as they have perfected their title by way of adverse possession/with prescription of time. In substance, the plaintiffs claimed that their predecessor, namely Jassa Ram, their father, was in the cultivating adverse possession of the agricultural land, who died in the year 1984. Jassa Ram was in the continuous possession of the land since the year 1960. Thereafter, the plaintiffs had continued to cultivate the land. Neither Jassa Ram nor the plaintiffs cultivated the land as tenants. Some of the defendants entered appearance and contested the suit. It was asserted that the plaintiffs were the tenants and were paying 1/3rd share of the produce in lieu of the lease money.