JUDGEMENT :- This is a defendants' second appeal. One of the defendants-appellants died during the pendency of the appeal and has been substituted by his heirs. Likewise the plaintiff-respondent died during the pendency of the appeal and has been substituted by his heir Swami Nath.

2. The dispute in this case relates to a portion of plot No. 34, 2 bighas 4 biswas and 10 dhurs in area. Relying on a registered patta dated the 10th of October, 1948, executed in his favour by the then zamindar the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit in respect of the disputed piece of land against the defendants-appellants in the year 1950 purporting to be one under Section 180 of the U.P. Tenancy Act on the allegation that the plaintiff-respondent was a tenant of the disputed land whereas the defendants-appellants had trespassed on it only a few days before the suit.

In defence the defendants-appellants pleaded that they were in possession with the permission of the zamindar ever since December, 1929, in accordance with a deed of licence executed in their favour on the 17th of December, 1929. The trial Court in that suit held that the Ijazatnama dated the 17th of December, 1929, resulted in creating hered

Click Here to Read the rest of this document