RANI Vs. AIDAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of the following circumstances. The respondents, who are four in number, instituted the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for the ejectment of the appellant's predecessor in interest (husband) from certain plots. The allegation was that the respondents were the occupancy tenants and the original defendant was their sub-tenant. The defendant pleaded that he was a co- sharer in the village and he was holding the land as his Khud Kasht. He denied the respondent's right to eject him as a sub-tenant. He also pleaded limitation.

(2.) The suit was thrown out by the Court of first instance, but on appeal the learned District Judge remanded an issue to the Muusif. That issue was: " Are the present appellants occupancy tenants in the land in dispute or is it Khud Kasht of the present respondents? " The learned Munsif held that the plaintiffs, the appellants before the first Appellate Court, were occupancy tenants. He also held that there was no relation of landlord and tenant between the parties and that the respondent (the original defendant) was a co-sharer in the patti in which the lands were situated and he held the land without the consent of the plaintiffs. He also held that as there was a lam-bardar in the patti the defendant could not be regarded as land-holder.

(3.) On receipt of the finding, the lower Appellate Court decreed the suit. It did not come to any conclusion in what capacity the defendant was in possession nor did it come to any conclusion how long did the defendants possession extend.