SHAKLOO AHIR Vs. MUNSHI AHIR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shakloo son of Dabar Ahir, one of the defendants in suit No. 2136 of 1957, has filed the present second appeal. He has arrayed Munshi Ahir, plaintiff of the suit as respondent No. 1. Pekhu Ahir, Pujan Ahir and Kishore Ahir, the three brothers of the appellant, who were co -defendants along with him have been arrayed as respondents Nos. 2 to 4 in this appeal. Relationship between the parties will be evident from the following pedigree, which is not in dispute.

(2.) Trial court referred the issue about Sirdari rights to the revenue court which held that the defendants were Sirdars of the land in dispute. Trial court adopted the finding recorded by the revenue court and held that the plaintiff had no right in the land. It was also found that entries made in various revenue records showed that it were the defendants who had been in possession over the land in dispute throughout. The suit filed by the plaintiff was, therefore, barred by time. In the result plaintiff's suit was dismissed.

(3.) Plaintiff then went up in appeal. Lower appellate court was of opinion that the issue about Sirdari right should not have been referred to the revenue court. It accordingly remitted the issue about the Sirdari rights of the parties to the trial court for recording its own finding. After going through the evidence on the record, the trial court reported to the appellate court that in its opinion also the defendants were the Sirdars of the land and that the plaintiffs had nothing to do with it.