200 and also in respect of the other 23 survey numbers was dismissed.
The State of Gujarat preferred two second appeals to the High Court of Bombay challenging the decision of the District Judge in regard to 23 survey numbers in one case and 60 survey numbers in the other.
The said respondents in C. A. 2283 acquired from the jagirdars of village Jinjarvani in Ghhotaudepur Taluka in District Baroda the right to cut certain trees standing on 32 survey numbers and also on survey No.
200 by two documents executed on April 25, 1954 by the jagirdars.
In the other suit the plaintiffs title to the trees standing on 20 out of the 80 survey numbers was declared and the claim regarding the other 60 survey number was dismissed.
The State of Gujarat filed a written statement in each case companytending that the plaintiffs vendors had numbertitle to the trees because of the Jagir Abolition Act, 1954 and the plaintiffs therefore had acquired numberright by their purchase.
Respondents 1 and 2 in C. A. 2283 instituted a suit in the companyrt of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Baroda, on October 16, 1954 for a declaration of their title to the trees purchased from the jagirdars and for permanent injunction restraining the State of Gujarat from obstructing the plaintiffs from cutting, felling and removing the said trees.
The plaintiffs in the two suits preferred appeals to the District Judge, Baroda, against the decision of the trial Court.
In the suit out of which C. A. 2283 arises the trial companyrt found that by virtue of Section 5 of the said Act the Jagirdars had become occupants of 9 of the survey numbers and the plaintiffs had acquired by transfer a valid right to cut the trees standing on these survey numbers.
The predecessor of the respondents in G. A. 2284 obtained a similar right in respect of certain trees in 80 survey numbers situated in village Sanada in the same taluka and district the transaction in this case is evidenced by two documents dated May 25, 1953 and June 25, 1954.
Respondents 1 and 2 in C. A. 2283 and the predecessor in interest of the respondents in G. A. 2284 were forest companytractOrs.
C. Gupta, J. The facts are similar in these two appeals on certificate from a companymon judgment of the Gujarat High Court disposing of two letters patent appeals.
The predecessor of the respondents in C. A. 2284 filed a suit in the same companyrt on January 7, 1957 for similar reliefs in respect of the trees he had purchased.
The claim as regards survey No.
The District Judge also allowed the other appeal upholding the plaintiffs claim with regard to the 60 survey numbers which was rejected by the trial companyrt.
