DHANBHAGVATI Vs. MANDSAUR ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 3010-1971, whereby the Addl. District Judge has after reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on 20-4-1970 dismissed the suit for recovery of rent.

(2.) Facts essential for the decision of this appeal are as under : Shri Manoharlal, the predecessor-in-title of the plaintiff-appellant herein brought the suit giving rise to this appeal on the allegations that the suit lands were acquired fot the defendant-company under the provisions of the Kanoon Mutallik Husul Aarazi, Samvat 1974 (for short, the Acquisition Act) and were allotted to them, the defendant-company on 28-7-1938 (Samvat 1995). The plaintiff and Choudhari Kacharsingh were co-tenants of the said lands. A Patta dated 28-7-1938 (Ex. P/6) was executed between the parties. The rent (annual Lagan) reserved thereby was Rs. 100/- per annum. Term No. 4 of the said Patta provided that half of the Lagan will be paid to the plaintiff and the remaining half to Choudhari Kacharsingh. In case of the rent remaining due in arrears the defendant undertook liability to pay interest thereon at the rate of 1 % per mensem, vide term No. 6. It was further averred by the plaintiff that the defendant-respondent had paid to the plaintiff rent at the rate of Rs. 50/- per year up to 1962. However, the rent accruing due thereafter has not been paid in spite of demand by notice dated 17-4-1967 Ex. P/4, served on 20-4-1967, vide Acknowledgment Due Ex. P-5. Hence the suit for recovery of Rs. 150/ after giving up the claim for time- barred rent and Rs. 48/- by way of interest at the rate of 1% per measem -- in all Rs. 198.00.

(3.) The claim of the plaintiff-appellants was resisted by the defendant- respondent-company on the grounds that the suit suffers from the defect of non-joinder of the necessary parlies and status of the defendant under the Patta is that of a sub-tenant (Shikmi). This status continued up to 2-10-1959. Consequently, the defendant became the occupancy tenant and thereafter Bhumiswami. Accordingly, the suit is not maintainable and that the Patta was granted by two persons, namely, the plaintiff and Choudhari Kacharsingh. As such, the suit could not be brought by the plaintiff alone without joining Chondhari Kacharsingh.