(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the appeal order of the learned Additional Commissioner, Jaipur dated 26-4-54 confirming the decision of the S. D. O. Rajgarh dated 26-4-54 by which he had dismissed the plaintiff appellant's suit for a declaration of her tenancy and possession over land khasra No. 68 and issue of an in junction restraining the respondents from interfering with her cultivation and possession over the land.
(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and have carefully perused the record of the case. The appellant's case is that she got this land from her husband Pratap Singh Jagirdar of the village, respondent No. 5 for purposes of cultivation and the same was recorded in her name as a khatedar in possession in khasra teep from Svt. 2007 to 2009 and that the defendants No. 1,2,3,4 who had never cultivated this land in the past were unlawfully interfering with her possession by posing themselves as tenants in possession of this land. She therefore prayed that the might be declared as a tenant of this land and in case the defendants claimed possession over it, the same may be declared unlawful and she might be put in possession thereof and further that the defendants be restrained from interfering with her cultivation in future. Pratap Singh defendant No. 5 supported the claim of the plaintiff and added in his written statement that he had given the land in question to his wife (appellant) in her havala and that the same was in her cultivatory possession since Svt. 2007 and that the other defendants had no concern with this land and were never admitted by him as his tenants. The suit was completely denied by the defendants N. 1,2, 3,4 who pleaded that they were the tenants of Partap Singh and had been in possession of this land since long and that Partap Singh having failed in his attempt to evict them had bolstered up this case in the name of his wife on the basis of incorrect entries made in the khasra teep in collusion with the Patwari of the village.