The judgment emphasizes the importance of evidence, legal documents, and rent payment in proving permissive possession and disputed tenancy.

JUDGMENT

Ramendra Jain, J. (Oral) - Through this appeal the plaintiffs have assailed judgment and decree of the Lower Appellate Court dated 28.2.2018, dismissing their suit while setting aside judgment and decree dated 12.10.2015 of the Trial Court in their favour.

2. Briefly, appellants-plaintiff filed suit a for permanent injunction against the respondents for restraining them from dispossessing the appellants from the suit property except in due course of law, claiming themselves to be in permissive possession of the suit land as 'gair marusi' since the time of their forefathers. The Trial Court, after holding trial decreed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 12.10.2015, thereby restraining the respondents from evicting the appellants from the suit land illegally or forcibly, except in due course of law.

3. Being aggrieved, respondents approached the lower Appellate Court, who after hearing both the sides accepted their appeal, while setting aside judgment and decree of the Trial Court in favour of the appellants vide judgment and decree dated 28.2.2018.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants inter alia contends that the lower Appellate Court has illegally set aside well-reasoned judgment and decree of the Trial Court, wherein it was specifically held that from the revenue entries long possession of the appellants over the suit land was proved on record beyond any shadow of doubt. The lower Appellate Court did not appreciate revenue entries qua possession of the suit land in favour of the appellants in a right perspective. Showing copy of jamabandi for the year 2009-10, he further contends that entry regarding 'batai tehai' shown in the said jamabandi, which is continuing since 1959-60, proves tenancy of the appellants through their forefathers over the suit land. Even otherwise, the appellants could not have been evicted from the suit land except in due course of law.

5. Having given thoughtful consideration to the above submissions, this Court finds the instant appeal completely devoid of any merit for the reasons to follow.

6. It is needless to mention here that tenancy is always a bilateral agreement. Appellants claimed themselves to be "gair marusi" tenants over the suit land. However, they have no documents such like lease/rent agreement or any rent receipt showing their possession over the suit land executed by respondents-landlord in their favour to prove their permissive possession over the suit land. Hence, above plea of tenancy of the appellants has rightly been rejected by the lower appellate Court.

7. Appellants have claimed their possession over suit land through their father, who admittedly died long ago around 30 years back from the date of filing of the suit. However, revenue entries continued in his favour showing his possession, which fact in itself proves that the revenue entries in favour of a dead person from any angle were stray entries. Therefore, the appellants cannot be permitted to take any help of those stray revenue entries.

8. For brevity findings of the lower Appellate Court recorded in para nos. 19 & 20 are reproduced hereunder:-

"19. It is admitted fact that defendants are owners of the suit property. It is also not in dispute that entries of Khasra Girdawari of suit land are in favour of plaintiffs. In Jamabandi of the suit land, father of the plaintiffs has been shown in possession of the suit land as Gair Marusi.

It is settled proposition of law that tenancy is bilateral contract and mere entry of 'Gair Marusi' is not sufficient to prove tenancy. Payment of rent is a necessary ingredient to determine the relationship of landlord and tenant. Non payment of rent negates existence of relationship of landlord and tenant. In this case, the column of payment of rent has been left blank in Jamabandi in respect of the suit land comprised in Rect. No. 90, Khasra No. 24 and 25/1. However, in column of rent of Jamabandi regarding suit land comprised in Rect. No. 103/7, a rent of 1/3 rd being helper and exp