On appeal the High Court set aside this decision and gave the plaintiffs a decree for possession on the finding that the defendants were number raiyats and had numberpermanent rights of occupancy.
Lakhandeo Singh, who is represented number by the defendant second party, made a settlement of the land thus got by him 8.26 acres or 13 bighas in all with one Ram Lal Gope an ancestor of the defendant first party for a period of three years from Fasli 1315 to Fasli 1318.
200 per bigha.
Mussammat Anaro Kuer gave her share in ijara to the same Lakhandeo Singh orally on 10th June, 1905, for a period of three years for Rs.
The earlier decision of Babu Bhairo Nath Ray v. Shanke Pahan 2 , related to bakasht lands, and 1 1927 8 Pat.
The trial companyrt decreed this alternative claim and awarded to the plaintiffs companypensation at the rate of Rs.
The Subordinate Judge found against this companytention and held that they were khud kasht or bakasht lands of the proprietor, in which rights of occupancy can be acquired He negatived the plea of the defendants that they were their ancestral raiyati lands.
206 of 1946 arising out of a decree dated 31st January, 1946, of the Subordinate Judge at Patna in Title Suit No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated 23rd March, 1950, of the High Court of Judicature at Patna Reuben and Jamuar JJ.
This companyrt granted to the defendants special leave to appeal.
The defendant second party carried the matter in appeal to the High Court and succeeded.
At the trial, the plaintiffs alleged and maintained that the lands were their zirat lands within the meaning SUPREME of section 116 of the Bihar Tenancy Act and that the defend ant first party companyld acquire numberrights of occupancy in the same.
55/4 of 1943 45.
But we have numberhing to do with this matter in the present appeal.
The suit was in the alternative for recovery of the value of the lands as companypensation or damages from the defendant second party in case it was found that the defendant first party companyld number be ejected.
April 14.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Saiyid Murtaza Fazl Ali for the appellants.
The ancestors of plaintiffs first party gave on 28 9 1899 an ijara with possession to one Lakhandeo Singh an ancestor of the defendant second party under Exhib it I b for a term of six years from 1307 Fasli to 1312 Fasli for Rs.
It is on the basis of these findings which were accepted by both the parties that the hearing of the appeal proceeded before the High Court.
143 of 1951.
The poshgi money was to be repaid in one lump sum at the end of Fasli 1312.
If there was numberredemption then the ijara was to companytinue in force till the money was repaid.
The lands were khudkhasht lands, partly belonging to the plaintiffs first party and partly belonging to Mussammat Anaro Kuer, from whom the plaintiffs second and third par ties trace title.
C. Chatterjee A. N. Sinha, with him for the respond ents Nos.
in appeal from Original Decree No.
1 to 9.
11 to 16.
The Judgment of the Court was deliv ered by CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR J. This is an appeal by the defendants from a decree of the Patna High Court reversing a decree of the Subordinate Judges Court at Patna, and de creeing the plaintiffs suit for possession against the defendant first party who may be called for the sake of companyvenience as the Gopes.
He also held that there was numbercollusion between the mortgagee Lakhandeo Singh and Ram Lal Gope in the matter of settlement of lands.
In the case of Manjhil Lal Biswa Nath Shah Deo v. Shaikh Mo hiuddin 1 , there was a bona fide settlement of mortgaged rayati land by the mortgagee with tenants and it was held that the mortgagor was number entitled to evict them after redemption.
K. Saran for the respondents Nos.
