UDEY RAM Vs. TEJU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the records of the Courts below.

(2.) THE present Regular Second Appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) THE suit was resisted and contested by the Defendants, raising the preliminary objection of limitation, cause of action, multifariousness, mis -joinder of parties and also questioned the locus -standi of the Plaintiff to file the suit. On merits, though the Defendants admitted that Punnu Ram was tenant of the suit land, but according to them, the Plaintiff figured nowhere, whereas the suit land was cultivated by Khyali Ram alone as a tenant and after his death, the Defendants succeeded to his estate alongwith the tenancy land. Since they happened to be the owners of the suit property, they were competent to transfer the land in favour of Defendants No. 2 to 6. Defendants maintained that entries in the revenue record are correct, as per possession on the spot, hence prayed for dismissal of the suit.