ASHOK PAL SINGH Vs. MOTI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition by two plaintiffs was admitted by this Court on 23-111954, on the following point : "Whether in the erstwhile Mandi State easement rights could be acquired against the State or not."

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Both the Courts below have answered the question in negative. The learned trial Judge has pointed out that under the Mandi Limitation Regulation, (Regulation V of 1975 Sm.), there was no period of limitation as against the State, vide Section 3 of that Regulation. Before the learned District Judge, it was urged by the respondent's learned counsel that under the Mandi State Laws, no rights of easement could be claimed or acquired against the Darbar property. Mr. Thakar Parshad, who appeared for the appellant in that Court, did not challenge the correctness of that proposition, vide the judgment of the District Judge.

(3.) In this Court, Mr. D. N. Vaidya, for the petitioners argued that Section 3 of Regulation V of 1975, did not mean that easement rights could not be acquired against the Darbar. He also invited my attention to the Mandi Limitation Amendment Act of 1997 Sm. Under Section 3 of the Amendment Act, Section 3 of the Regulation V of 1975, was recast as follows : "There shall be no adverse possession against the State."