SHAMBHU SINGH Vs. BANSHILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal has been filed by the defendant against whom the respondents' (Shri Banshilal and Satya Narain) suit for recovery of possession over the land in dispute was decreed by the trial court, the additional Commissioner, Udaipur confirming the same in first appeal.

(2.) WE have heard the learned counsel appearing of the parties and have gone through the record as well. The main contention raised on behalf of the appellant before us is that the suit was instituted beyond the prescribed period of limitation and hence it should have been dismissed by the lower courts. The facts of the case are that Banshilal and Satya Narain instituted a suit in the court of the S. D. O. Vallabhnagar (Udaipur District) on 29. 10. 53 against Jaswant Singh, Shambhu Singh and Gamer Singh with the allegations that he had been cultivating the land as a tenant since Svt. 1990, that he continued in possession till Svt. 2005 when the defendants started a criminal prosecution against him and when he was under custody took forcible possession over his land in Asadh Svt. 2005. Both the lower courts have found it as a fact that the plaintiff was in possession in Svt. 2005 and that he was dispossessed wrongfully in the month of Asadh of that year. According to the Gregorian calendar, this would be July, 1948. The suit, as pointed out above, was instituted on 29. 10. 53, i. e. more than 5 years after the accrual of the cause of action.