GITA DEVI Vs. ROSHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment, decree dated 12.1.1999 passed by learned District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Appeal No. 6 of 1991 affirming the judgment, decree dated 11.10.1990 passed by learned Senior Sub Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No. 25/1 of 1989, whereby the suit of respondent Roshan Lal was decreed.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that respondent Roshan Lal had filed a suit for declaration and possession against Lala Ram, predecessor -in -interest of the appellants regarding land comprised in Khasra No. 127/10, Khewat No. 28, Khatoni No. 34, measuring 6 -2 bighas, village Batoli, Pargana Bahadarpur, Tehsil Sadar, District Bilaspur vide jamabandi for the years 1984 -85. The pleaded case of respondent was that suit land was allotted as nautor to his mother Smt. Ram Dei about 12 -13 years ago and the possession was also delivered to her. Smt. Ram Dei died a few months after the allotment of the suit land and thereafter respondent inherited the suit land and became owner thereof. Lala Ram was an influential person and he got Khasra girdawari entries changed in his favour and took possession on 6.8.1987 of the suit land forcibly in absence of respondent, who was working at Rajban in District Sirmour. Lala Ram had no right, title or interest in the suit land. The revenue entries showing Lala Ram in possession as tenant are factually incorrect inasmuch as Lala Ram was never inducted as tenant on the suit land. In these circumstances, the suit was filed.

(3.) I have heard Mr. K.D. Sood, learned Counsel for the appellants and have also gone through the record. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. Mr. Sood, learned Counsel for the appellants has submitted that two courts below have erred in decreeing the suit of the respondent. It has been proved on record that Lala Ram was inducted as tenant on the suit land. He has submitted that Ex.DA copy of jamabandi 1988 -89, Ex.DB copy of Khasra girdawari 1989 -90 and the statements of DW -1, DW -2 and DW3 have been misconstrued. The presumption of truth is attached to the subsequent revenue entries. In alternative, Lala Ram had acquired title on the suit land by way of adverse possession or of tenancy rights by adverse possession. Substantial questions of law No. 1 to 4 :