BHOLANATH BAG Vs. SUDHIR CHANDRA JANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants in this Court were defendants in the trial Court. The sole respondent had brought a suit for recovery of damages or mesne profits against the appellants on the basis of a decision made in a title suit in which the respondent was the plaintiff and the appellants were the defendants. The previous title suit was numbered as Title Suit No. 91 of 1942. There is some dispute in the present suit as to the quantity of the land which was the subject matter of that suit. I shall advert to that question later. Suffice it for the present purpose to say that the title of the plaintiff respondent in respect of one-third share was declared to the disputed lands of Title Suit No. 91 of 1942, and a decree for joint possession with the appellants of this appeal, who had the remaining two-thirds share, was also passed in that suit. That decree was passed on 23rd September, 1942. An appeal and a second appeal were preferred from the decree of the trial Court, but the decree of the trial Court stood ultimately confirmed, and the respondent of this appeal took delivery of possession of the decretal lands through Court on 13th September, 1948.

(2.) AFTER having taken delivery of possession of the disputed lands through Court, the present suit was instituted by the plaintiff respondent for recovery of damages or mesne profits for the years 1941 to 1948 on the allegation that he had been wrongfully kept out of possession for all these years in respect of his one-third share, and the defendants had remained in wrongful possession of the lands in sixteen annas share.

(3.) THE suit was contested by the defendants on various grounds, their main defence being that the disputed lands had been possessed by the plaintiff and not by the defendants during the years in suit, and the quantity of crops alleged by the plaintiff was excessive. Limitation was also pleaded on behalf of the defendants.