BANTO DEVI Vs. PREM KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are the legal representatives of original defendant Jaishi Ram. whereas, the respondents are the legal representatives of original plaintiff Tajan widow of Barkat Ali and they will be referred to as defendants and plaintiffs in this judgment. The name of another original defendant Shiv Ram, who was impleaded as proforma respondent No. 2 in this appeal, was deleted by order dated 3.12.1996 at the request of learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) The defendants have filed the present regular second appeal to assail the decree and judgment dated 22.8.1984 passed by District Judge. Hamirpur and Una Districts camp at Hamirpur whereby the appeal of the plaintiffs was accepted and the decree and judgment dated 28.5.1981 of Sub Judge 1st Class, Hamirpur was set-aside. The Sub-Judge had dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs, which was filed for possession of the land measuring 11 kanals 17 marlas, situated in Tika Jhamerh Musalmana, Tappa Jhaniara, Tehsil and District Hamirpur (hereinafter called the land in dispute). It is not in dispute that the land in dispute was earlier in possession of Fazzaldin, Navi Bakash, Jaimaldin Mohammad and Gulam Mohammad, who were Mohammadan Gujjars and migrated to Pakistan on the eve of partition and the property is said to have been treated and declared evacuee property. Fazzaldin and others had mortgaged the land in dispute in favour of one Gopala son of Kahna, who sold his mortgagee rights in favour of Bali Ram, Kalyanoo, Niranjan Dass, Ram Chand and Krishan Kumar sons of Sohnu and consequently they became mortgagees in place of Gopala. One Mohan, who was father of Jaishi Ram, the original defendant, was inducted as tenant on the land in dispute by Gopala. Accordingly, in the year 1947 Fazzaldin and others were the mortgagors and owners, and Beli Ram and others were the mortgagees and Mohan was the tenant on the land in dispute.

(3.) The claim of the plaintiff is that the Custodian under Section 20-A of the Displaced Persons Compensation Rehabilitation Act, 1954 (hereinafter called the 'Act of 1954') allotted the land in dispute to her and Mutation No. 114 dated 18.1.1968 was also sanctioned in her favour. According to her, the land in dispute stood redeemed by operation of law being evacuee property and the rights of the mortgagees and that of tenant under them stood extinguished. Thus, she had filed suit for possession against the original defendants Jaishi Ram and Shit; Ram. who were sons of Mohan, who was recorded as tenant under the mortgagees.