RAM PARKASH Vs. KIRODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, legal heirs of respondent No.4-Hari Ram and respondent No.9-Omi, as mentioned in para 2 of the application are ordered to be brought on record, for the purpose of prosecuting the present appeal.

(2.) The plaintiff claims to be in possession of the property as tenant. There is no dispute that the plaintiff-appellant was in possession of the property in question and the proceedings for his eviction were initiated by the defendants. Initially, the eviction order was passed on 23.11998 and in execution thereof, the possession was delivered. However, the tenant filed appeal and the order was reversed by the Appellant Court on 24.07.2003. It is also not in dispute that the aforesaid order passed by the Appellate Court has been affirmed in revision by the Commissioner of the Division.

(3.) In the present case, the plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration that the entries in the revenue records which have been changed in favour of the defendants should be directed to be corrected. Such suit is maintainable under Sec. 45 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887. Learned Trial Court has dismissed the suit on two grounds:-