PRITAM CHAND Vs. MOHINDER PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law on 27th June, 1995:

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that appellant Pritam Chand (hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff') filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the respondents defendants from interfering in his possession over the land measuring 7 kanals 14 Marias as described in the heading of the plaint. In the alternative, he prayed for decree of possession of the suit land. It was alleged that earlier the plaintiff had been in occupation of the suit land as a tenant under the owner, on payment of rent and after coming into force the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, he had become the owner. It was further alleged that the respondents defendants, without any right, title or interest, were trying to cause interference in the possession of the plaintiff.

(3.) LEARNED trial Court framed various issues and concluded that the plaintiff was earlier a tenant in respect of the entire suit land and that after corning into force the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, he had become the owner. It was held that out of the suit land, the defendants ware in possession of land measuring 2 kanals 15 marlas bearing Khasra No. 939 min, Khatauni No. 208 min and Khasra No. 1170 min, Khatauni No. 212 min, but their possession was held to be illegal and consequently decree for possession, in respect of said 2 kanals 15 marlas of land and a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in the possession of the plaintiff over rest of the suit land, was passed.