The appellant filed a second appeal before the learned Judicial Commissioner who remanded the case to the District Judge directing him to give his finding on the question left undecided by him, namely, the question as to the applicability of Section 11 2 .
Radhu, as the owners thereof.
The application of the respondent was resisted by both Kubja and the appellant on the grounds that the respondent was never me tenant of the said land but had taken forcible possession thereof, that he had thereafter relinquished its possession in a Panchayat and further that as the appellant was a minor, having numberother means of livelihood except the said land, he was entitled to the protection of Sub section 2 of Section 11.
In March 1961, the respondent, claiming to be still the tenant, applied for the proprietary rights of the landholders in the said land under Section 11 1 of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, XV of 1954 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
On December 6, 1960, Radhu, as the guardian of the minor Kubja, sold the said land to the appellant for Rs.
The period of the lease expired in Rabi 1960.
The said Subda died in the result Kubja became the sole owner of the said land.
The land stood in the names of one Kubja and Subda, the minor daughters of Smt.
M. Shelat, J. This appeal, by special leave, companycerns a piece of land, measuring 27 bighas and 17 biswas, situate in village Chethla, District Mahasu in Himachal Pradesh.
