AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
I.A. No. 753/2015 has been filed by the Defendant nos. 3 to 6 / Respondent No. 3 to 6 herein, seeking a direction upon Defendant No. 1 & 2 in the suit i.e. Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh and Khas Mahal Officer, Hazaribagh (Respondent No. 1 & 2 herein) for renewal of building lease in respect of Sarkari Hata Government Estate of village Cantonment Holding No. 271 Plot No. 210/1270, area 0.50 Acres of Hazaribagh Municipality during pendency of the instant appeal.
The suit was filed by the appellants for declaration that Schedule ''A'' land is a raiyati land of the plaintiffs with all sorts of right, title and interest and Defendants have no right, title and interest over the same. They sought further declaration that the possession of the plaintiffs along with the legal heirs of Dhaneshwar Ram be confirmed. Alternatively, if they are found not in possession, they may be put in khas possession after evicting the Defendants. They had also sought a declaration for permanent and temporary injunction against the Defendants from disturbing the plaintiffs from their possession. They also sought a declaration that the Sale Deed No. 1770 dated 16.02.1951, Correction Deed No. 5057 dated 14.07.1954 and the Deed of Lease granted in favour of Miss. Mira Roy (Respondent No. 3), is null and void, forged and without jurisdiction. The suit was dismissed on contest with cost. The aggrieved plaintiffs is the appellants herein. Appellants have also contested the I.A. through a counter affidavit. Private Respondents have also filed a reply thereto.
Upon consideration of the submissions of the counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that such a prayer in the present appeal on the part of the private Defendants is not maintainable. Plaintiffs are dominus litis who are pursuing the appeal on being aggrieved with the dismissal of the suit. No relief in the way of cross-objection was sought by the Defendants in the suit or in the present appeal. In these circumstances, remedy of the private Respondent No. 3 to 6 herein may lie elsewhere, if permissible in law, and not in the present appeal. Accordingly, instant I.A. is dismissed.