MADHAB KAIBARTA Vs. BIR CHANDRA JUBARAJ GOSWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The real contention in this special appeal is that whereas a Civil Court has already decreed the lands, the rents of which form the subject of the plaintiff's suit, to the intervenor, the plaintiff could not sue as in actual receipt of the rents, bond fide, with reference to the terms of Section 77 of Act X of 1859, as he would thus render inoperative a Civil Court decree. The plaintiff sued the defendant in this case, for arrears of rent, alleging that the lands appertained to the plaintiff's property, Surail.

(2.) The Maharaja (appellant) intervened, alleging that the lands did not belong to the plaintiff's talook, but to his (the Maharaja's) property, Nurnagar.

(3.) It is clear from the proceedings of the Court, and from the state of pleadings on the record before us, that if the lands be found to be in the plaintiff's estate of Surail, the intervenor (Maharaja) has no claim under the Civil Court decree. On the other hand, if the lands are found to be within the Maharaja's estate of Nurnagar, the plaintiff has no claim to the rents of such lands. The first Court has clearly found, as a fact, that the lands for the rents of which the plaintiff sues, belong to the Maharaja's estate of Nurnagar.