TARENDRA NATH DAS Vs. KHTHODE CHANDRA DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for a declaration that principal Defendant Respondent No. 1, namely, Khirode Chandra Das, is not a Bargadar under Plaintiff Tarendra Nath Das in respect of some lands described in the schedule of the plaint and that the order passed by the Sub divisional Officer of Tamluk on August 5, 1954, in Bhagchas Case No. 444 of 1954-55 restoring possession of the said lands to the above Respondent is illegal and without jurisdiction.

(2.) The principal Defendant maintained that he was a bargadar of the suit lands and that the order in question was a valid order. This defence was negatived by the trial court which decreed the suit. An appeal was preferred by the principal Respondent which succeeded. The lower appellate court reversed the decree of the trial court and dismissed the suit of the Plaintiff on two grounds, namely, that the suit was not maintainable and that the principal Defendant was a bargdddr. The Plaintiff of the trial court has preferred this second appeal challenging the correctness of both the grounds on which the appeal was allowed by the lower appellate court.

(3.) First of all, I shall proceed to decide whether the finding of the lower appellate court that the suit is not maintainable in law is correct. This finding involves a pure question of law. Then I shall address myself to the other question raised in this appeal, namely, whether the principal Defendant Respondent is a Bargadar under the Plaintiff-Appellant.