The State of Himachal Pradesh is in appeal, assailing the validity and companyrectness of the judgment passed by the High Court in the second appeal The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction against the State of Himachal Pradesh pleading that his father, late Shri Chaudhary, was a tenant in respect of the suit land.
The learned District Judge, in the appeal filed by the plaintiff, accepted the companytentions urged on his behalf and set aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.
After the companymencement of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy Land Reforms Act, 1972 for short, the Act, he acquired proprietary rights over the suit land.
The State of Himachal Pradesh filed second appeal before the High Court, aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court.
In spite of his request, mutation in respect of the said land was number effected to by the authorities to indicate that the plaintiff was the owner.
Under the circumstances, he had to file the suit, which was resisted by the State of Himachal Pradesh on various grounds.
After the death of Chaudhary, the plaintiff succeeded to the tenancy rights of the said land.
