SINGH RAM Vs. BHAGAT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals have been placed before us to answer the following questions:

(2.) The material facts which led to the formulation of the aforesaid questions are as follows:

(3.) One Joti Ram, since deceased and represented by his legal representatives the present Appellants had instituted a suit for possession of land measuring 4 biswas, comprising Khasra No. 412/104/2, Khata Khatauni No. 64/126, situated in Mauza Taruwala, Pati Dayalgarh, Teh: Paonta, more specifically detailed in Tatimfa Shajara filed with the plaint (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit land) and for damages in the sum of Rs. 200/-. The case as made out in the plaint is that the said Joti Ram was inducted as a tenant over the suit land by its owners, the Defendants, in the year 1963 and he was liable to pay 1/4th of 'Gala Batai' as rent. It was further agreed between the parties that said Joti Ram could raise construction over a part of the suit land for purposes subservient to agricultural purposes. Pursuant to the terms of the tenancy said Joti Ram brought 7 Biswas of land out of the total land of 11 biswas comprising Khasra. No. 412/104 under cultivation and on the remaining portion measuring 4 biswas thereof depicted in the Tatima as Khasra No. 412/104/2 constructed sheds for the purpose of residence, tethering cattle and to store chalf etc. On 6.5.1969 Respondents Bhagat Singh and Saran Singh (since deceased and now represented by his legal representatives, that is, Respondents Manmohan Singh, Jagjit Kaur and Jeewan Singh) taking advantage of the absence of Joti Ram took forcible possession of 4 biswas of land comprising khasra No. 412/104/2 and started construction thereon. On return to his house said Joti Ram requested them to resist from their un-lawful activities but of no avail. Thereafter, Respondent Bhagat Singh made an application to the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade Paonta for correction of revenue entries. The said application was decided on 7.2.1970 and the entries regarding possession of the land in suit were ordered to be made in favour of Respondent-Bhagat Singh and deceased Defendant Saran Singh. Joti Ram preferred an appeal against the said order of the Assistant Collector 2nd Grade and in the appeal said order was set-aside. In the meantime, the deceased Plaintiff had applied for grant of right, title and interest of land owner to him in the suit land under Section 11 of the H.P. Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).-On legal advice being given the said application was subsequently withdrawn. In the meanwhile, Respondent No. 1 and deceased Defendant Saran Singh constructed a house over the land, in suit. Had the deceased-Plaintiff not been dis-possessed from the suit land he could have earned a sum of Rs. 500/- therefrom but in the suit he has restricted the claim for damages in the sum of Rs. 200/-. The repeated requests of the deceased Plaintiff to Bhagat Singh and deceased Defendant Saran Singh did not yield any positive result and on the contrary they refused to put the deceased Plaintiff in possession of the suit land and to pay the compensation as requested by him. Hence, the deceased Plaintiff instituted this suit oh 17.1.1976.