BHAG SINGH Vs. JAWAHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal has been placed before the Full Bench in accordance with the reference order of Mahajan J. dated the 10th February, 1961.

(2.) THE suit giving rise to this appeal was instituted on the 17th March, 1959, the plaintiffs being Jawahar Singh and Punjab Singh, who are now the contesting respondents to the appeal. There were three sets of defendants, Bhag Singh son of Santa Singh being described as defendant No. 1, Arian Singh and Santa Singh being described as defendant No. 3. The suit as described in the heading was for possession of 33 bighas 5 biswas of agricultural land comprising of Khasra Nos. 263, 264, 265, 266, 345 and 272 situated in village Harchandpura and relief was claimed on the basis of possessory title as well as an agreement and other rights of the plaintiffs. In addition there was a claim of Rs. 200/- as compensation by way of damages. The following were the allegations in the plaint. In the beginning of 1954 the plaintiffs had obtained the land in suit along with other land for cultivation from defendant No. 3 who were the owner of the land and the plaintiffs had entered into owners of the land and the plaintiffs had entered into possession. Thereafter on the 19th June, 1954, there was a written agreement between Jawahar Singh plaintiff and defendant No. 3 to the effect that so long as the debt due from them to Jawahar Singh plaintiff was not paid defendant No. 3 would not be entitled to get back possession of the suit land from the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs then cultivated the suit land from 1954 to October, 1957 and had sown the rabi crop of gram and wheat in the land but in the month viz. October 1957, defendants Nos. 1 and 2 took forcible possession of the land as well as the crops thereon and without the decree or order of any Court subsequently cut the growing crop. It was stated in para, 5 of the plaint that on the 7th August, 1957, defendant No. 3 had sold the suit land along with some other land to defendant No. 2 and Jawahar Singh plaintiff had instituted a suit for possession by pre-emption, which was decreed. The damage to the plaintiffs on account of their crops having been illegally cut was estimated at Rs. 200/ -. In para 7 of the plaint it was maintained that at the time of taking of forcible possession, there was between the plaintiffs and defendant No. 2 a relationship of landlord and tenant but as more than one year had elapsed from the date of taking of forcible possession the relationship of landlord and tenant had ceased to subsist and hence the civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

(3.) IN the written statement on behalf of defendants Bhag Singh, Arjan Singh and Santa Singh, the assertions made in the plaint were generally denied though it was admitted that the plaintiffs had filed against them a pre-emption suit and appeal against that decree had been lied in the High Court in which the plaintiffs had been restrained from obtaining possessing of the land in pursuance of their preemption decree. As regards paragraph No. 6 of the plaint, it was said that no question of any damage having accrued to the plaintiffs arose as the plaintiffs were not owners of the land or the crop. As regards paragraph No. 7 of the plaint it was asserted that the possession of the defendants was not unlawful inasmuch as there was in there was in their favour assail deed duly registered in respect of the land in suit.