Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

I may say here that in this particular case according to the finding of the learned Civil Judge with which I have no reason to disagree, the tenant had put Raghuvar Dayal defendant in possession of the property in collusion with him. This Reghuvardayal filed a suit for ejectment and the tenant entered into a compromise and suffered a compromise decree for ejectment being passed against him. In execution of that decree Shivchand tenant was dispossessed. Under these circumstances to my mind the plaintiff was  entitled to actual possession of the property in dispute and the defendant Reghuvardayal who came into possession of that property certainly interfered with the possession of the plaintiff.