DONGARAM DEY Vs. ABDUL HAMID

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff in this case sued the defendant as holding certain Bhita lands in his use and occupation, which Bhita lands he alleged were part of his talook purchased by him. The defendant's allegation was that the lands were not in the talook alleged by the plaintiff, but were in another talook in which he was a co-sharer with the plaintiff.

(2.) The first Court, after a remand by the lower appellate Court, finally decided, on the 21st October 1868, that it had not the "smallest doubt that the lands are part of plaintiff's purchased talook;" and then the Court goes on, "as no objection has been made to the rate of rent, and as defendant, having held and enjoyed the lands since the sale, is liable to an equitable rent for them, I give a decree for Rs. 10-14, and coats of Rs. 4-4, and fees As. 8-9, Total, Rs. 15-10-9."

(3.) On appeal, the Judge records: "I think with the Deputy Collector that the defendant holds rent paying land and land for which rent has been received by plaintiff's predecessor, within the plaintiff's talook. The evidence is scanty on this point, but I think sufficient." Then, as regards the rates, the lower appellate Court remarks: "I do not think that the defendant in his deposition on oath before this Court, and which with the plaintiffs statement formed the grounds from which to frame issues, raised any objection as to the rates so that it is necessary now to return this case for trial on this point." The lower appellate Court then concludes its judgment by dismissing the appeal with costs.