RAMESH KUMAR Vs. ROSHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the record.

(2.) APPELLANTS -plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that the entries in the revenue papers, showing respondents-defendants No.1 1 to 3 as owners in possession of certain land described in the plaint, were wrong and illegal and that as a matter of fact the said land was in possession of the appellants-plaintiffs as tenants under one Hoshiar Singh. It was alleged that Hoshiar Singh had inducted the father of the appellants-plaintiffs as tenant on the suit land on sharing of the produce of the land but the defendants procured wrong entries in the revenue papers, showing them as tenants, and on the basis of those wrong entries, proprietary rights were also conferred upon them under the provisions of H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act. It was alleged that the mutation order, conferring the proprietary rights upon the respondents-defendants, was passed behind the back of Hoshiar Singh and also the appellants-plaintiffs. Relief of permanent prohibitory injunction, restraining the respondents-defendants from interfering in the possession of the appellants-plaintiffs, was also sought. In the alternative prayer was made for passing a decree for possession.

(3.) TRIAL Court framed various issues on the pleadings of the parties and at the end of the trial found all the issues against the respondents-defendants and the suit was decreed. The defendants went to the Court of learned District Judge. The learned District Judge has reversed the finding of the trial Court that the appellants'- plaintiffs' father was inducted as tenant on the suit land by previous owner Hoshiar Singh and that defendants-respondents' father had never been in possession of the suit land and that the entries showing him initially as tenant and thereafter as owner were wrong and consequently accepted the appeal and set aside the decree passed by the trial Court. Appellants-plaintiffs have now come to this Court.