MANNA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Plaintiff has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge dismissing the appeal preferred by the plaintiff-appellant against the order of the learned Sub Judge 1st Class (II), Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., whereby the suit for declaration filed by him has been dismissed,

(2.) Proceedings under Section 163 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act were initiated by the revenue authorities against the appellant-plaintiff for encroaching on Government land. Appellant was held to be an encroacher and an order of eviction was passed by the Assistant Collector Ilnd Grade. The appellant filed a suit for declaration in the Court of Sub Judge 1st Class (II), Rohru on the plea that he is an agriculturist by profession and the land in dispute has been occupied by the predecessor in interest of the appellant from generation to generation. Land in khasra-No. 79/163 min Kh. No. 4/1, measuring (M3-19 hectares was in possession of his ancestors and now he is in peaceful cultivating possession. He alleged that entries in the revenue record showing the ownership of the State are wrong and that he has become owner of the land by way of adverse possession. It was pleaded that the order of the Assistant Collector Ilnd Grade, Rohru dated 17.2.1989 ordering his eviction is illegal and without jurisdiction. The learned trial Court, considering the totality of evidence on record, dismissed the suit holding that the order passed by the Collector was legal, the plaintiff had not been able to establish his adverse possession and had no enforceable cause of action. An appeal preferred before the District Judge also met with the same fate.

(3.) This appeal was admitted by this Court on 12.1.1996 on the following substantial question of law: