1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-The brief facts of this appeal by special leave, are as follows: Badar Din, the father of the appellants, leased out 9 kanals and 8 marlas of agricultural land situated in Hadbast 1.26, Village Naulakha, district Lahore, for a period of 200 years to one Sardar Udham Singh at the annual rent of Rs. 235 beginning from the 18th of November 1902: The lease deed was duly registered. The said Udham Singh transferred his rights and interests in the land to Pandit Wazir Chand and Krishan Lal, who, in their turn, transferred them to a firm, Mehr Singh Sampuran Singh. The aforesaid lease deed contained several conditions, providing inter alia, that if after 7 years, the lessees defaulted in the payment of rent for any period of 6 months running, the lessees would be liable to be ejected, and also that at the end of the lease period of 200 years, the land shall be restored to the lessor in a cultivated position clear of any super-structures that may be put up there by the lessees.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for tile appellants and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Honorary Secretary, R.B.L. Banwari Dass Charitable Trust Society Limited, as well as the learned counsel for the Custodian, Evacuee Property, and the Chief Settlement Commissioner. The other respondents, i.e., the persons in whose favour permanent transfer deeds have been issued by the Settlement authorities, in respect of the structures standing on parts of this land, have not put in appearance, and were placed ex harte. According to the Jamabandi of the mauza in question for the year 1941-42 (Annexure `X' on record), both Khasra No. 224 and No. 225 are shown to be in the ownership of the Provincial Government. Khasra No. 224 measuring 30 ft. In area is shown as karkhana, whereas Khasra No. 225 measuring 38 ft. Is recorded there as a shop. The name of the kashtkar is shown as Nazul department care of Trust R. B. Banarsi Dass etc. As ghair dakhil karan.
3. No. Lagan is payable for these Khasras on account of banna shikni. As for these two Khasra Nos., according to the report of the Chief Settlement Commissioner. Khasra No. 224 is now a road, and Khasra No. 225 is a charitable building, and no -transfer deed has been made by the Chief Settlement Commissioner in respect of either. Even the Rent Controller had declined the application of the appellants for the ejectment of the respondents from these Kltasra Nos., as in the final ejectment order, these Khasra Nos. Were omitted, and ejectment of tile respondents was ordered only from Khasra kilos. 574, 575 and 576 as entered in the Jamabandl of 1944-45. The appellants can have no cause of action against the Custodian or the Settlement department so - far as these two Khasra Nos. Are concerned. If they have , any claim in respect of the same, they must seek their legal remedy in the civil Courts, if so advised.
4. As regards the land comprised in other Khasra Nos., viz. 574, 575 and 576, containing shops and quarters, in respect of which the Settlement Department has issued permanent deeds in favour of the respondents displaced persons, it seems .To us that the Settlement Department should reconsider the matter talking into account the terms of the original lease deed, which ostensibly conveys only lease rights to tile lessees for a period of 200 years, reserving the reversionary rights of ownership to revert to the lessors and their successors-in-interest oil tile expiration of the lease period. The transfer deeds, as issued by the Settlement Department, prima facie, also seek to extinguish these rights without any consideration as to whether these rights do or do not exist under the lease deed executed by the fatlict of the appellants.
5. The parties will bear their own costs.