RAKHAL RAJ RAI Vs. HAZI SHAIKH ABDUL AZIZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against a judgment of Roxburgh J.

(2.) These appeals arise out of two suits for rent being numbered Rent Suits Nos. 557 and 558 of 1944. The claim for rent in these two suits was for the period 134T to 1350 B.S. In order to appreciate the contention which was raised in the courts below and which has been pressed in these two appeals, it is necessary to state the following facts:

(3.) The pro forma Defendant Haji Abdul Aziz was the owner of 5 annas and odd share in a zemindary. In regard to two annas share held by him, there was a putni in favour of certain persons who may be called the Roy Choudhuris. The Roy Choudhuris defaulted in payment of the putni rent and the putni was brought to sale under the Putni Regulation and was purchased by the Appellant Rakhal Raj Rai. In the courts below a contention was raised as to whether Rakhal Raj Rai was a benamdar for the defaulting putnidars or not. The lower appellate court has found that Rakhal Raj Rai was not their benamdar. This contention being a question of fact has not been further canvassed either before Roxburgh J. or before us.