Rajinder Kumar v. Kaushal Chand And ANR

DEEPAK KUMAR 2026.03.07 12:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

RSA-3647-2011 (O&M) -25.

Mr. Shahpuri has assailed the findings recorded by the Courts below. He submits that the plaintiff is in possession of the suit property as a tenant. His possession stands proved in the light of the Revenue Record up to the year 2002-2003. It being settled proposition of law that once a tenant is always a tenant, until defendants are able to prove that the plaintiff was ejected or that the plaintiff surrendered the tenancy, suit filed by the plaintiff seeking decree of permanent injunction cannot be dismissed. 6.

During the course of arguments, this Court has put a specific query to Mr. Shahpuri, counsel for the appellant as to the entry in Column No.9 of the Revenue Record. Mr. Shahpuri very fairly concedes that even though in Column No.5, the plaintiff has been recorded as Gair Marusi but there is no corresponding entry in Column No.9. As per settled proposition of law, a person merely entered as a Gair Marusi without there being any corresponding entry in Column No.9, cannot be held as a tenant. 7.

In view thereof, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the well reasoned findings recorded by the Courts below. Finding no merit in the present appeal, the same is ordered to be dismissed. 8.

Pending application, if any, shall also stands disposed off. March 05, 2026 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No DEEPAK KUMAR 2026.03.07 12:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document