PARMESHWARI DASS Vs. ROSHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Regular Second Appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 1.2.1999 passed by the learned District Judge, Una in Civil Appeal No. 94 of 1991.

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the respondents -plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as ˜the plaintiffs for convenience sake) filed a civil suit in the court of learned Sub Judge, Ist Class, Amb, District Una for declaration with permanent injunction and in the alternative for possession. The plaintiffs have stated in the plaint that one Ghasitu, Amar Nath sons of Sh. Tulsi Ram and Milkhi Ram son of Sh. Sudama, deceased, along with defendants No. 1 to 4, namely, Parmeshwari Dass, Harbans Lal, Nanak Chand and Parkash Chand got entered their names in the suit land at the back of the plaintiffs in connivance with the revenue field staff and on the basis of the said illegal and false entries in their names, said Ghasitu, Amar Nath, Milkhi Ram deceased and defendants No. 1 to 4 further got sanctioned the mutation No. 187 of proprietary rights with respect to the land mentioned in paras (a) and (b) of the head note of the plaint and mutation No. 188 of proprietary rights with respect to the land mentioned in para (c) of the plaint in their names illegally at the back of the plaintiffs without taking recourse to law though actually Ghasitu etc. deceased Milkhi Ram or defendants No. 1 to 4 were never inducted nor admitted as tenants on the suit land nor they paid any rent to the plaintiffs, which is a first requisite of tenancy. It is further averred that during the consolidation operation in the village, the defendants in connivance with the consolidation staff and also by taking benefit of illegal and false entries in the names of defendants No. 1 to 4 Ghasitu deceased, got allotted the suit land in their favour in the following manner : - Defendants No. 1 to 5 got allotted the land measuring 5 Kanals 12 marlas mentioned in para (a) of the head note of the plaint, defendants No. 6 to 14 got allotted the land mentioned in para (b) of the head note of the plaint and similarly, defendants No. 3 and 4 got allotted the land mentioned in para (c) of the head note of the plaint in their favour.

(3.) THE trial Court returned the following findings on the aforesaid issues : -