Bapna, J. —This is a revision by the plaintiff in a suit for recovery of rent amounting to Rs. 151/7/—

2. The allegations of the plaintiff were that the defendants were let into possession as tenants by document Ex. I, dated 16th July, 1945, but the defendants had not paid rent from 1st December, 1948, to 30th November, 1951, for a period of three years. The defendants admitted the execution of the rent note as also their being let into possession by the plaintiff, but pleaded that the particular property had been sold by auction sale in execution of a decree and was purchased by one Khajan Singh, who obtained possession of the property under orders of the court and thereafter the interest of the plaintiff ceased in the property, and they began to pay rent to Khajan Singh, and subsequently to his assignee Kanhaiyalal Radhakishan. The trial court, after evidence, accepted the plea of the defendants, and dismissed the suit, and the same judgment was upheld on appeal.

3. It was urged by learned counsel for the petitioner that the property originally belonged to Roopnarain, and had been mortgaged with the plaintiff and that thereafter in execution of a decree against Roopnarain, the prop

Click Here to Read the rest of this document