BRIJLAL Vs. DAU MOHANLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal comes before us on a reference by Chaturvrdi J. , who has referred the following questions for the decision of the Full Bench :

(2.) THE facts of the case are as follows. The defendants are the appellants, against whom a decree for joint possession subject to payment of Rs. 22-8-0 by the plaintiff has been passed in respect of field No. 153/1, area 0. 77 acre, which they brought under cultivation from waste land. The plaintiff as co-sharer seeks his share of the field and claims joint possession. The field is situated in patti No. 5 of mouza Janwani, tahsil and district Durg, in which patti the plaintiff has a -/12/and the defendant -/4/- share. The field in question was brought under cultivation after breaking up the waste land, and the finding of the Court below is that Rs. 30/- were spent by the defendant in improving and reclaiming it.

(3.) THE first question has been referred because the learned referring Judge felt that thers was a contradiction between the decision in Mahadeo v. Laxrnan S. A. No. 184 of 1949, D/-14-10-1954 (B) and Numan Singh v. Gurudeo, Kumari, 1942 nag LJ 207 (C), which was based upon other Division Bench cases. The learned referring Judge has also referred in paragraph 5 to several other cases of this court in which a view contrary to that taken in Second Apppeal No. 164 of 1949 (B) is to be found.