MANOHAR DAS Vs. CHARU CHANDRA PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE seven appeals are on behalf of the pltf and arise out of as many suits for recovery of 'khas' possession, or in the alternative for assessment of fair and equitable rent. The case of the pltf is as follows: The lands in all the suits are situate in Mouza Nala appertaining to Touzi No. 1 of the Burdwan Collectorate. The Maharaja of Burdwan, as owner of Touzi No. 1 granted a Mourashi Mokrari settlement of the lands in suits to the predecessor -in -interest of the pltf about 200 years ago. The pltf is the Mohant of a 'Math' which is very ancient institution and the Maharaja of Burdwan made the grant to the original Mohant of the Math. The pltf further alleges that all the lands appertain to the 'Mal' assets of the Maharaja and belong to the pltf's Mokrari Mahal in Mouza Nala. The deft's predecessors, according to the pltf, were 'Chakrandars'. Subsequently the 'chakran' lands were resumed and possessed in Khas by the pltf. Lastly, the pltf granted 'Bhag' settlement of the lands in dispute to the predecessor -in -interest of the defts. It is alleged that during the last cadastral survey operations in 1334 -1335 the defts and their predecessors colluded with the pltf's Gomastha named Annada Sarkar and got the lands recorded in the record -of -rights as 'bhog dakhal sutre niskar'. The pltf alleges that the entry in the record -of -rights is absolutely erroneous and that the defts are trespassers, but in case it is found that the defts are not trespassers, fair and equitable rent in respect of the holdings may be assessed.

(2.) THE defence which is material for the purpose of these appeals is that the defts and their predecessors -in -interest have been in possession of the lands in suit for long over 200 years without any demand or payment of rent; secondly, that the lands do not fall within the ambit of the regularly assessed Mahal of the pltf and as such they do not belong to the pltf's 'Mal' assets. Thirdly, that the pltf's claim is barred by limitation.

(3.) AGAINST the decision of the learned Munsiff the defts filed seven appeals in the Ct of the Dist Judge. The learned Dist Judge has reversed the decision of the learned Munsiff and dismissed the pltf's claim for assessment of rent. The learned Dist Judge has affirmed the finding of the learned Munsiff that the lands in all the suits appertain to the 'Mal' lands of the Maharaja of Burdwan and that the lands in all the suits are assessed to revenue and are parts of the 'Mal' estate of the Maharaja. But the learned Dist Judge has taken a different view as to the rights of the parties upon the evidence on the record. In the first place, the learned Dist Judge has found that the story of the pltf that the entry in the record -of -rights was the result of collusion between the pltf's Gomastha and the defts had not been proved. In the second place, the learned Dist Judge has further found that it is not correct to say that the entry in the record -of -rights was based only upon the documents which were held to be inadmissible by the learned Munsiff. He pointed out that the documents might have been taken into consideration by the Settlement Officer for the purpose of ascertaining the duration of the defts' possession & the Settlement Officer might have taken into account the oral evidence within living memory as to the non -payment of rent. In the third place the Ct of appeal below relied upon certain cess receipts, Exs. A to A (24), which, according to the defts, relate to four out of these seven appeals for the purpose of showing, that the tenancies were admitted to be rent -free ones in those receipts. In the fourth place, the learned Dist Judge found that the positive case of the pltf to the effect that the lands in suit were 'Chakran' lands held by the predecessors of the defendants & that they were subsequently let out in 'bhag' to the predecessors of the defts has not been established by any documentary evidence or any collection papers showing realisation of 'bhag' paddy. In the fifth place, upon a consideration of the entire oral and documentary evidence the learned Dist Judge has found that although there is no sufficient direct evidence of any original grant of rent -free title, there is sufficient evidence that the tenants and their predecessors have been holding the lands for a very long time on assertion of rent -free title to the knowledge of the landlord & without any objection or attempt on his part for assessment or realisation of rent. Lastly, the Ct of appeal below has found that the pltf's claim for assessment of rent is barred by limitation, because although there is no evidence of demand for assessment & refusal on the part of the tenants, the pltf had innumerable opportunities of making demand for assessment.