KANSHI RAM Vs. BASANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant No. 1 has filed this second appeal. The suit filed by the plaintiffs seeking declaration that they are the owners in possession of the suit land and the orders passed by the Assistant Collector as well as the Collector ordering the change in the revenue record are illegal and without jurisdiction and void with further prayer of permanent injunction that the defendants be restrained from interfering in the suit land, stands decreed by the learned trial Court and the judgment and decree stand affirmed by the learned first appellate Court in the appeal filed by the present defendant.

(2.) The plaintiffs pleaded that they alongwith the proforma defendant Nos. 2 to 14 succeeded to the estate of one Gangi being the nearest heirs and ever since her death, they are the owners in possession of the suit land. An application is said to have been filed by the defendant for correction of the Gardwari and the Assistant Collector vide order dated 23 -12 -1976 ordered the change treating the defendant as non -occupancy tenant. The said order stands upheld by the Collector vide order dated 23 -12 -1980 The plaintiffs claimed that they never inducted the defendant as tenant over the suit land and the orders passed by the Assistant Collector as well as the Collector are illegal and are not binding upon them.

(3.) The defendant while resisting the suit has come up with the plea that he was a non -occupancy tenant over the suit land under Gangi and has become owner by virtue of the provisions contained in the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act, 1972. The orders impugned by the plaintiffs are said to be perfectly legal and valid.