After the sale to the, respondents, the appellants created further trouble which led to proceedings in a criminal companyrt under s. 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the appellants were forbidden from going to.
Later on, the appellants were bound down under s. 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to keep the peace.,
Appeal from the Judgment and decree dated October 10, 1955, of the Patna High Court, in Appeal from Original Decree No.
the case put forward on behalf of the respondents and decreed the suit for possession and ordered that mesne profits would be determined subsequently.
497 of 57.
The matter may have been different if numberboundaries had been given in the final decree for sale as well as in the sale certificate and only the plot number was mentioned.
There was then an appeal by the present appellant to the High Court.
In the sale certificate also the same ten plots are mentioned.
In 1945, there was a murder in companynection with this property on account of which,.
Consequently the respondents filed the suit out of which this appeal has arisen in July 1946.
There.
were further troubles over the crop of these plots in 1945 Eventually after their acqittal by the companyrt of session, the appellants took possession of the property by forcibly dispossessing the respondents.
Thereafter the other defendants entered into possession of the property, delivery of which was made to them by companyrt.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The sale certificate companytains the khata number, the plot number, the area and the boundaries of each plot.
Among the ten plots mentioned in the final decree, there is a plot No.
the property in dispute.
It gives the Tauzi Number the Khasra Number, the Thana Number, the Survey Number, tile area and the boundaries of each plot.
Thereafter the respondents came into possession of the property,, The appellants however began to create trouble from 1942.
The other defendants remained in possession of the property sold it to the respondents in 1943.
483 of 1947.
some of the appellants were tried by, the companyrt of session but were acquitted.
The final decree companytains ten plots.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by WANCHOO, J. This is an appeal on a certificate granted by the Patna High Court The respondents brought a suit with respect to ten plots of land and claimed a declaration that the property belonged to them and prayed for possession of the plots by ejectment of the defendants appellants and for mesne profits, Besides the appellants, there was another set of defendants to.the suit from whom the respondents purchased the property.
V. Viswanatha Sastri and R. C. Prasad, for respondents Nos.
May 4.
1 to 7.
K. Jha and P.K. Chatterjee, for the Appellants.
This suit was decreed against the appellants , and, thereafter the, other defendants got the mortgaged property, sold by auction in execution and purchased it thmselves in 1936.
The suit was resisted by the defendants on a large number of grounds with which we are however number companycerned number.
As the decree was of variance the High Court granted a certificate and that is how the present appeal has companye up before us.
The trial companyrt accepted.
The respondents case was that the appellant had taken a loan from the other defendants on a mortgage bond on the basis of which, those defendants instituted a suit in 1932.
