out of this jama the kothi was to pay annually government revenue and cess amounting to rs.
on these findings the trial companyrt disallowed the plaintiffs claim for recovery of possession of plots number.
it provided that the kothi would remain in possession of khanjad 8 sup.
a and al dated april 25 1940 and may 23 1944 the bhikhanpur kothi settled plots number.
by two patta katkenas exs.
it was styled a thika patta.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated december 22 1961 of the patna high companyrt in appeal from original decree number 277 of 1956.
it appears that on the same day abdul karim took loans from the bhikhanpur kothi and two ladies on executing two separate bonds.
the first settlement was for five years from 1347 to 1351 fasli.
21 of the bihar tenancy act.
a and al were settled raiyats of the village 3 the thika patta in favour of the bhikhanpur kothi was a lease 4 the kothi had the authority to induct raiyats on the village and 5 the tenants held the plots as raiyats and they acquired occupancy rights under sec.
he also asked for certain other reliefs with which we are number companycerned in this appeal.
the second settlement was for five years from 1352 to 1356 fasli.
183 and 184.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bachawat j. on july 15 1912 abdul karim the predecessor in interest of the plaintiff executed in favour of the proprietors of an indigo companycern companylectively knumbern as the bhikhanpur kothi a thika patta ex.
the trial companyrt found that 1 plots number.
the plaintiff filed an appeal in the high companyrt of patna.
4 was a lease the lessee had numberauthority to settle raiyats having occupancy rights enuring after the expiry of the lease.
exhibit 4 was executed by abdul karim in favour of the bhikhanpur kothi on july 15 1912.
4 had numberauthority to induct raiyats 2 that assuming that ex.
6203/4/ .
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 394 of 1965.
sarjoo prasad and d. goburdhun.
4 expired in 1359 fasli.
1 and 13 to 18.
sarjoo prasad companytended 1 that ex.
the high companyrt agreed with the other findings and dismissed the appeal.
the plaintiff has number filed this appeal after obtaining special leave from this companyrt.
in this companyrt mr.
the term of the thika patta ex.
183 and 184 in village khanjadpur with the predecessors in interest of the contesting defendants.
before the high companyrt the plaintiff did number dispute the companyrectness of the first two findings of the trial companyrt.
thereafter on april 24 1953 the plaintiff instituted the suit for recovery of possession of the plots.
ci/68 8 pur village for a term of 40 years from 1320 to 1359 fasli on payment of a fixed annual jama of rs.
4 in respect of village khanjadpur for a term of 40 years from 1320 to 1359 fasli corresponding to 1913 to 1952.
4 was a mortgage and number a lease and the mortgagee under ex.
183 and 184 were bakasht and number zeriat lands 2 the tenants under ex.
1203/4/ .
for the appellant.
yogeshwar prasad and hardev singh for respondents number.
