BHOLA SINGH Vs. BANWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit to eject the respondents Mirchi and Banwari from a house which the plaintiff acquired under a sale-deed of the 27 June, 1921. The plaintiff came into Court on the allegation that the house had originally been purchased in execution of a decree by one Hira Lal who had leased it to Mirchi under a Kirayanama. The plaintiff bought the house from Hira Lal's heir. He alleged that Mirchi had sub-let the house to Banwari whom he also impleaded.

(2.) Banwari denied that any relationship of landlord and tenant existed between him and the plaintiff and set up his own title on the ground of adverse possession.

(3.) The first Court found that Mirchi had never obtained possession of the house and was therefore not a tenant and. could not be called upon to pay rent, that Banwari was in occupation as a trespasser but has not acquired an adverse title. The suit was accordingly decreed for possession.