PRABH DAYAL Vs. DAULAT RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Courts below whereby suit for possession of Stall No. 230 situated in Randhawan Market. Ambala Cantt. was dismissed.

(2.) The plaintiff has sought possession of the aforesaid stall claiming himself to be a tenant under the Municipality Ambala Sadar and that the defendant has illegally occupied the same and is in unauthorized occupation thereof. In the written statement, the stand of the defendant was that the suit is barred by time as he is in possession for the last more than 20 years. It was asserted that the plaintiff is not a tenant in the stall in dispute nor he could be inducted as a tenant by the Municipality Ambala Sadar as the defendant is in occupation thereof in its own right as owner and as lessee of Union of India through Military Estate Officer. Ambala Circle. Ambala. It was also asserted that the defendant has legally occupied the stall in dispute and even otherwise the possession of the defendant in the stall in dispute is for the last more than 20 years and. thus, defendant has become owner of the property by way of adverse possession. In additional plea. it was pleaded that one Ram Lal was owner of plot in dispute who abandoned it in or about the year 1957 and thereafter the defendant occupied the same and is now continuing in possession thereof to the knowledge of the Union of India and to the knowledge of Ram Lal and his predecessor-in-interest.

(3.) Keeping in view the respective pleadings of the parties, learned trial Court framed the following issues :