RAM KISHAN Vs. SHEO CHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the concurrent decisions of the Courts below dismissing the plaintiff's suit.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal are that Deegha was the last occupancy tenant of the land measuring 4 bighas 16 biswas, which is denoted in the revenue papers by khasra Nos. 1238 and 1260 situate in village Shamspur. Deegha, occupancy tenant, died on the 17th of June, 1942. without leaving a heir. The plaintiff entered into possession of the occupancy tenancy on the plea that he was the adopted son of Deegha. However, on the 7th of October, 1942, Sheo Chand and others brought a suit for possession by partition of these khasra numbers. The title of that suit was Faqira etc. v. Ram Kishan etc. In that suit a decree to the extent of 21/32 shares was passed in favour of the plaintiffs with regard to these two khasra numbers, and on the 7th of March, 19(sic), symbolical possession was delivered of this 21/32 shares to the plaintiffs. The present suit was filed by Ram Krishan, the alleged adopted son of Deegha, to the effect that the defendants be restrained from getting the land partitioned. This suit was necessitated because the defendants applied to the Revenue Court for partition where a question of title was raised by the present plaintiff with the result that a direction was given by the Revenue Court for getting the question of title settled by the Civil Court. The plaintiff's claim is based on his alleged adoption by Deegha and also on the basis of adverse possession. The only material issue that arose for determination in the Courts below was with regard to adverse possession. The Courts below have found as a fact that the plaintiff is not the adopted son of Deegha. It has also been found that the plaintiff has not proved his title to the land in dispute by adverse possession. On the question of adoption no arguments have been addressed to me, and rightly so because this being a finding of fact would not be open to question in second appeal.

(3.) FOR the reasons given above, this appeal fails and is dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.