DHARAM CHAND Vs. MAKHAULI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the records.

(2.) PLAINTIFF / respondent filed a suit for possession of land bearing Khasra No. 552, measuring 0-18-10 Bighas, against the appellant / defendant, claiming that he was owner of the said land and that about 18 years back his father had allowed the appellant / defendant, on latter's request, to install a rice-husking machine on the said land. It was stated that the earnings from the operation of the rice-husking machine were agreed to be shared by the appellant / defendant and the father of the respondent / plaintiff. It was further alleged that the appellant / defendant had stopped sharing the earnings and, therefore, the plaintiff was entitled to take back the possession of the suit land.

(3.) VARIOUS issues were framed by the trial Court. Ultimately, findings were returned that neither any exchange had taken place nor had the appellant / defendant acquired title by prescription and consequently the suit for possession was decreed. Appeal was filed before the learned District Judge against the decree of the trial Court. That appeal has been dismissed and the judgment and decree of the trial Court affirmed.