STATE OF H.P. Vs. HARI MOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the two courts below whereby the trial Court of Sub Judge 1st Class, Kandaghat, District Solan, by judgment and decree dated 8th July, 1991, passed a decree for vacant possession of the suit land measuring 1 biswa after ejectment of the defendants and removal of the material lying there belonging to them, and the appeal taken by the defendants was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Solan, by his judgment dated 21st July, 1992.

(2.) The plaintiff -respondents filed the suit for possession of land measuring 1 biswa comprising Khasra No. 753/670/111/1 in village Bohli, Tehsil and District, Solan, claiming to be its owners. It was pleaded that the Forest Department of the defendants i.e. the State of Himachal Pradesh through the Collector Solan and the Divisional Forest Officer, Solan, has constructed a hut in the said land in dispute. Earlier the predecessor -in -interest of the plaintiff -respondents i.e. Sant Ram had filed a suit for declaration against the defendants on the ground that he along with one Kapoor Singh also predecessor -in - interest of the other plaintiffs was owner in possession of land measuring 4 biswas comprising of Khasra No. 670/111, of which the land in dispute in the present proceedings forms a part. Consequential relief for permanent injunction was also prayed in the earlier suit for restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession of the then plaintiffs. That suit was decreed by the trial Court i.e. Senior Sub Judge, Solan, on 31st August, 1981. Declaration was granted that the predecessors -in -interest of the plaintiffs in these proceedings were owners of the suit land of the previous suit. At the same time it was found that they were in possession of only 3 biswas, out of 4 biswas claimed by them. The remaining 1 biswa was shown to be in possession of the defendants. Therefore, permanent injunction was only granted in respect of three biswas. An appeal was taken by the defendants against the decree of the trial court in the previous suit which was also dismissed by the Addl. District Judge, Solan, on 15.10.1982.

(3.) The case of the plaintiffs of the present suit is that the defendants are in possession of the suit land as licensees and the licence having since been revoked, they have still failed to hand over possession to the plaintiffs, hence the suit for possession by ejectment of the defendants and removal of the hut in question.