BHARGAVA, J.—These three revision petitions are being dealt with together as the petitioner is common to them and they also raise common questions of law and fact.

2. In the court of the Munsif, Alwar, the plaintiffs-non-petitioners filed separate suits for ejectment against the defendants-non-petitioners who were described as tenants of one Shivlal deceased from whom they claimed to have purchased the suit property. The defendants in their written statements denied that they held the property as tenants of Shivlal. They stated that they were in possession of the suit property since the time of their ancestors and were permanent tenants of the land and had constructed houses on it at their own costs. They further pleaded that Shivlal had no right to transfer the suit property to the plaintiffs in each case as he was the muafidar or jagirdar whose jagir had been resumed by the State of Rajasthan under the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act of 1952 (hereinafter called the Act of 1952) and thus the ownership of the suit property vested in the State. They also stated that the alleged sale in favour of the plaintiffs was fictitious.

3. The trial court did not frame any is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document