SABITRI DEVI THIRANI Vs. SATYA NARAIN MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Patna High Court. The facts may be stated. The appellant had purchased land measuring 3 Bighas, 6 Kathas and 3 Dhurs in the town of Kishanganj, Bihar. Out of the aforesaid land the dispute between the parties relates to an area of 1 Katha and 10 Dhurs. The respondent entered upon the aforesaid area and erected some structures on it. The appellant filed a suit in the year 1959 against the respondent for possession and mesne profits in respect of the land. The suit was resisted by the respondent on various grounds. One of the points which was raised by the respondent was that the interest of the appellant in the suit land was that of an intermediary and it had vested in the State under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 hereinafter called the 'Act'. The suit was decree by the trial court and that decree was affirmed by the first appellate court.

(2.) On Second appeal by the respondent the High Court called for a finding on the question as to what was the character and nature of the appellant's interest in the disputed land. The Additiona'l Subordinate Judge submitted a finding that the appellant held the interest of an intermediary in the land. This finding was not disputed before the High Court when the judgment under appeal was delivered. What was contended was that the suit land was homestead and was saved from vesting in the State by S. 5 of the Act. The High Court was of the opinion that the suit land was not homestead within the meaning of clause (j) of S. 3 which gives the definition of the term "homestead". This is what the learned judge observed:

(3.) The appeal fails and it is dismissed but in view of the entire circumstances we leave the parties to bear their own costs throughout.