BUDHI SINGH Vs. SEWA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two defendant's second appeals directed against the judgment and decrees of the District Judge of Chamba, who disposed of two appeals by the same judgment as common questions of law and fact arose. The plaintiffs-respondents are transferees of the rights of the Central Government in evacuee property which had vested absolutely in the Central Government, free from all encumbrances, under the provisions of Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. They came to Court with a claim of absolute ownership of the plots of land in dispute based upon a permanent allotment to which the provisions of Rule 58 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955, applied. This rule lays down:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the defendants-appellants has relied strongly on the following finding of the lower appellate Court interpreting the settlement entries:-" So it means that it was after 1947 that the defendants came in possession as tenants and not that they have been cultivating the land as tenants for the last 40 or 45 years, that is to say, prior to 1947." This view of the lower appellate Court was expressed when it referred to what could transpire from the revenue records which proved that the claim of tenancy rights from the evacuees extending to a period of 40 to 45 years and prior to 1947 was, in any case, untrue. The lower appellate Court also came to the conclusion that rent receipts (Exs. D-7 and D-7/1) filed by the defendants were not genuine.

(3.) Learned counsel for the plaintiffs-respondents rightly urges that the finding relied upon is only an observation about what the settlement entries could indicate, but that the real position in law is that the defendants were no better than licensees. He relies on the provisions of Section 8, Sub-section (4) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950:-