BIR SINGH Vs. KISHAN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard and gone through the record.

(2.) Respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for possession of land, comprised in khasra Nos. 166/1 and 169, alleging that earlier his father was in possession of the said land as a tenant and that after the conferment of the proprietary rights, under the provisions of H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, he (plaintiffs father) became the owner. He claimed that possession had been with the father of the plaintiff from the very beginning, i.e. since the inception of tenancy, but in the year 1981-82, the father of the defendants-appellants, who was a brother of the father of the plaintiff, got his name incorporated in the column pertaining to the name of persons in possession and on the strength of that entry forcibly dispossessed the plaintiff from the suit land in the year 1990.

(3.) Suit was contested by the appellants- defendants. They alleged that the suit was barred by time, the plaintiff had no cause of action nor did he have the locus standi. Further, it was alleged that suit was not maintainable. Objection that the suit was bad on account of non-joinder of necessary parties, was also raised. It was pleaded that the suit land was held by the father of the appellants-defendants, the father of the plaintiff and another brother of theirs, named Sunko, jointly as tenants, under the previous owners, named Birbhan and Kishori Lal, and therefore, the conferment of proprietary rights upon the plaintiffs father in respect of the entire suit land was a wrong and a bad decision taken by the Revenue Authorities, and that decision had been taken behind the back of the defendants' father.