KHAZANA RAM Vs. GHUNGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties are stated to be real brothers. Plaintiff -appellant claims himself to be the exclusive owner in possession of the suit land, as described in the plaint, on the plea that he exclusively was in occupation of the suit land as tenant under the Panchayat and later on under the State of H. P. on payment of rent and entries in the revenue record showing the plaintiff and defendant as tenants in occupation of the suit land, were wrong - A suit was preferred by the plaintiff -appellant seeking declaration to the effect that he only was the exclusive owner of the suit land on account of his being in exclusive possession as tenant over the entire land to the exclusion of the defendant -respondent. As a consequential relief, prohibitory injunction was prayed for. On the other hand, defendants simple case had been that he alongwith the plaintiff were the joint tenants of the suit land on payment of rent and both of them had been granted proprietary rights under the provisions of H P, Tenancy and Land Reforms Act in the year 1986 and both are in joint possession of the land as owners.

(2.) Parties were put to trial by the trial Court on the following issues :

(3.) Learned Counsel for the defendant -respondent at the very outset has raised an objection that on account of concurrent findings of fact given by the two courts below pertaining to the tenancy claimed by the parties, the present appeal even at this stage, does not survive. But on the other hand, learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the evidence examined during the trial has not been correctly and legally appreciated which requires the intervention of this Court.