DONKANGOUDA RAMCHANDRAGOUDA Vs. REVANSHIDDAPPA SHIVALINGAPPA BALGANUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal from a decision of the Assistant Judge of Bijapur, and the question involved is as to the construction of a rent-note, dated December 4, 1879, by which the predecessor of the plaintiffs rented a lease of certain property to Basappa, the predecessor-in-title of the defendants. Basappa died prior to 1904, and the defendants have always remained in possession, and have paid no rent since the death of Basappa. Therefore, unless the lease created a permanent tenancy, the plaintiffs' title would be barred by adverse possession, because the possession of the defendants would become adverse on the death of Basappa. If the tenancy was a permanent one, the possession of the defendants would not become adverse until they disputed the plaintiffs' title, which was only a year or two before the suit was filed; so that, if the tenancy was permanent, limitation would not bar the defendants.

(2.) THE document in question is in these terms : I, Basappa bin Irapanna hereby pass the rent-note in your favour in respect of a house (described therein) on condition of paying to you annual rent of Rs.10. I shall go on paying the amount of rent and take a receipt from you every year. You should not evict me from possession of the house so long as you receive from me the said amount of rent. I will not give up possession though you evict me. In any year that I fail to pay the amount of annual rent I shall give up possession paying you the arrears of rent till that day without putting forward any excuse. I shall go on making repairs at my cost. I shall not ask you anything for the expenses in this behalf. You must never raise the rent (or assessment) beyond the agreed rent of Rs. 10 per year, I shall never pay you more than Rs. 10.3. Both the lower Courts have held that the document created a tenancy for the lifetime of Basappa, and, therefore, the possession of the defendants became adverse to the present plaintiffs as from his death. It will be noticed that the document used throughout the first person singular; no words of limitation are used, and there is nothing to suggest that the parties contemplated the continued existence of the lease or tenancy after the death of Basappa. No doubt, in this country there is no settled system of conveyancing, and a permanent tenancy may be created without the use of any words of inheritance, although, if the intention be to create a permanent tenancy, one would expect to find a reference to heirs or successors; but, in my view, in order to constitute a permanent tenancy, the Court must be able to say from the terms of the doccument, which creates it, that the parties contemplated that the lease would continue after the time at which, according to its terms, it would normally expire, in this case after the death of Basappa.

(3.) THE appeal, therefore, must be dismissed with costs.